5. The consequences of the visits After the visit to the remand prison of Lyon-Corbas in December 2014 and before the visit report was sent to the authorities, the Contrôleur général wished to inform the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Social Affairs, Health and Women’s Rights of the observations made in the Regional Mental Health Department for Prisons (SMPR) of the institution pursuant to Article 9 of the amended Law dated 30 October 2007, due to the severe violations of the fundamental rights of persons deprived of liberty. In fact, one of the lodging cells of the SMPR, cell 206, had been designed to act as a seclusion room; it was called DPU, in reference to the emergency protection device fitted on the persons placed in it. Regularly, people whose mental disorders disturb the detention were placed in this cell by the warders, often wearing riot gear. People were placed there on medical prescriptions, sometimes on the suggestion of the direction of the institution. The person is forcefully stripped and, if necessary, is given a forced injection, which is repeated as many times as necessary. The person is deprived of access to visiting rooms, the telephone and, more generally, all of activities accessible to the SMPR or in detention for the entire duration of the placement. This practice is labelled as “therapeutic” by the healthcare workers. Consulting the dossier of a person who was subjected to this placement (executed pursuant to Article 8-1 paragraph 6 of the amended Law dated 30 October 2007, by an inspector who was also a doctor) did not allow finding any trace of the prescription. The practice of treatment without consent of detainees affected by mental disorders can only be executed in the form of a complete hospitalisation according to the terms of Article L. 3214-1 of the Public Health Code. The absence of healthcare staff at night deprives people who are imprisoned in this manner from any medical surveillance; the administered treatments are likely to have side effects that require an urgent medical intervention. The use of this type of placement is far from being atypical. It was used thirty-five times during the first eleven months of the year for periods varying from a few hours to five days. The Contrôleur général wished to know the observations of both ministers as concerns the measures taken to stop this violation of rights. In reply, the ministers indicated that cell 206 was transformed into a “calm down room”, the conditions of use of which have been specified in a protocol. The Contrôleur général asked the Director General of the Regional Health Agency of Rhône-Alpes to provide her with a copy. The protocol revealed that admitting a detainee to this room is subject to a medical prescription and a systematic traceability in the medical dossier. It is implemented in the case of persons suffering from an acute crisis that requires them to be secured and treated, but does not include suicidal persons, who are placed in an emergency protection cell, for a maximum duration of twelve hours. Depending on the condition of the patient, he/she can either be returned to detention, admitted to a normal cell of the SMPR or admitted for a complete hospitalisation pursuant to the provisions of Article L. 3214-1 of the Public Health Code. The patient is accompanied by healthcare staff members only; stripping the patient and dressing him/her in pyjamas must be subject to a medical prescription. Finally, the Contrôleur général was told that cell 206 is no longer used for long durations or at night, and that the number of hospitalisations had returned to a normal level. 58