public order, the future of the detainees and the rights of their victims, and recommended that, to help in reintegration, the rules of accessing computers, concerning the acquisition of hardware, storage capacities, access to the Internet and an electronic messaging service must be made more flexible and harmonised, in compliance with security requirements. The testimonies received by the CGLPL showcase the persistent difficulties related to the use of computers in detention. The local practices are very different; the rate of provision for incarcerated persons varies significantly from one institution to the other; the difficulties reported in 2011 in an opinion pertaining to the access to computers for detainees are still present. Locally, the best trained and equipped IT staff are able to grant tolerances of use that the quality of their oversight makes possible without endangering the security of the institution. Therefore, the CGLPL believes that the DAP must set up an effective organisation so that detainees can benefit from digital means necessary for maintaining their family bonds and preparing for their reintegration into society. The CGLPL regretfully observed that the bill for a digital Republic, submitted before the National Assembly on 9 December 2015, is completely silent on the question of detainees’ access to the Internet. In addition to the recommendations made by the CGLPL and reiterated to the Government during the Contrôleur général’s interview with the Secretary of State in charge of digital resources, this point was the subject of a proposal made by the National Digital Council during an online consultation on the bill. The Government explains its refusal to consider these suggestions as follows: “allowing detainees to access digital resources is a major factor in reintegration and the prevention of repeat offences. However, this access remains limited in most penal institutions. While the access to online services is a right, it must nevertheless be supervised and controlled by the prison administration, since these restrictions result from constraints inherent to detention, the maintaining of security and order of the institutions, the prevention of repeat offences and the protection of the interest of the victims. At this stage, it does not seem appropriate to modify the law. On the other hand, the Government has registered digital access in penal institutions as one of the major themes of the digital strategy launched on 18 June 2015. This plan proposes deploying technical solutions in penal institutions to allow a limited and secure access to the Internet and to an electronic messaging service. Moreover, the detainees could, if applicable, benefit from training in digital tools, in order to increase their chances of reintegration.” As useful as this plan seems, it doesn’t guarantee that the targeted objective will be met. The tight budget situation of the State even raises concerns that, when integrated in its institutional and budgetary context, the “digital strategy theme” will lose a significant part of its priority nature and its visibility. In the 2016 budget, this theme is not part of the strategic presentation of the annual performance project, nor is it in the performance indicators and objectives of the budget plan 107 - “Prison administration”. Such an omission only weakens its credibility. The restrictive nature of a legal provision would have a more durable and incentive character, and would have been a better guarantee of the effectiveness of the rights of detainees. For its part, the CGLPL will keep an eye on detainees’ access to computers and will definitely evaluate the conditions of implementation of the “digital strategy theme” defined by the Government. 57