reply, the CCTV cameras were still installed in the room used for the medical activities of psychiatry. 1.2 Emergency Recommendations dated 13 November 2015 pertaining to the collective transportation of foreign nationals who were taken in for questioning in Calais During an visit of the administrative detention centre (CRA) of Coquelles in July 2015, the CGLPL observed a practice of group transfers of people even though the centre was not full. In a letter addressed to the Minister of the Interior on 7 August 2015, the Contrôleur général stated her concerns about the risks of violation of these people’s right to effective remedy and the consequences of these movements. In October 2015, the CGLPL was alerted of the implementation of a similar process of transfers, but on a larger scale, to seven CRAs in the national territory (Metz, Marseille, RouenOissel, Paris-Vincennes, Toulouse-Cornebarrieu, Nîmes and Mesnil-Amelot). The inspectors therefore decided to carry out verifications on site. They visited the border police (PAF) station of Coquelles on 26 and 27 October 2015 to fully monitor the transfer, by aircraft, of forty-six people to the Nîmes CRA on 27 October 2015; they also attended the arrival of thirty-five other people to the Paris-Vincennes CRA on 3 November 2015, and once again, along with the Contrôleur général, visited the Coquelles police station on the night of 9-10 November 2015. The observations made on site led the Contrôleur général to issue emergency recommendations, which were addressed to the Minister of the Interior on 13 November 2015. The latter acknowledged the observations through a letter dated 24 November.  A collective processing of transfers resulting in a collective and summary treatment that deprives people of access to their rights Due to the collective management of situations, the detainees’ access to their rights and to information is insufficient. Most of the notifications of the administrative decisions and the rights of the detainees, which the inspectors had attended, were carried out unsatisfactorily: collective notifications in especially crowded and noisy places, poor interpreting conditions or absence of interpreters (replaced by submitting written documents), lack of information on life in the CRA and the missions of the legal aid associations, etc. On examining eighty-one administrative procedures (OQTF and administrative detention), the CGLPL observed that the decisions were based on stereotyped motivations and identical arguments; certain of them are printed beforehand (handwritten notes added in blank spaces: date of the procedure, civil status of the person and destination) and several decisions do not even determine a specific country of destination. These documents, evidently prepared in advance, are proof of a lack of examination of the individual situation of each person. Moreover, these collective transfers limit legal aid and damage the effectiveness of the right to remedy, since a large portion of the period is neutralised by the duration of the journey. The CGLPL gave a reminder of its recommendation to reduce the intervention period of the liberty and custody judge to 48 hours, which would allow a more effective oversight of the lawfulness of the procedures. Finally, the CGLPL stated that several persons were released on the decision of the administration before the legal check of the liberty and custody judge.  Disgraceful conditions for detainees as well as staff 42