236.Deployment of staff was a major cause for concern. At all three prisons, gendarmes were observed to spend much of their time on duty in the area between the outer wall and the inner wall, i.e. not actually inside the inner core of the prison. During the day the inner prison was dominated by the prisoners circulating within the inner walls, with very occasional presence of prison staff. When the delegation decided to conduct a night visit at Abomey Prison it became clear that entering the inner prison at night after lock up was a most unusual phenomenon. At night the inner prison was virtually a no-go area for staff. 7.Security and control: discipline, segregation, use of force and restraints 237.The SPT notes that in addition to the Criminal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure, which would apply where crimes were committed within the prison, the main source of information on discipline and sanctions is Decree No. 73-293 on the organisation of prisons. The directors of the prisons visited confirmed that the prisons did not have additional internal rules aside from the Decree. According to the Decree, sanctions can include the removal of visiting rights, of the right to smoke, of corresponding with the outside world, and of receiving food from the outside; all for a maximum of one month. In addition, sanctions can include placement in a cell which will automatically also incur the other available sanctions. The director may impose placement in a cell for a maximum of eight days, whereas the Procureur may order a stay of 30 days, and the Minister of Justice a stay of 45 days, and in exceptional circumstances, 3 months. All such sanctions should, according to the Decree, be detailed on the register of sanctions. (a)Disciplinary process 238.At Cotonou Prison, the director clarified that the Brigade Pénitentiaire would be responsible for investigating any crimes committed within the prison, whereas the guardien chef would be responsible for any disciplinary sanctions. He also reported that there were two cells within the Penitentiary Brigade, one of which was used for disciplinary sanctions and could hold two prisoners simultaneously. The delegation found that this cell measured 2.4m x 1.96m, with a ceiling height of 3.4m and an additional section measuring 1.8m x 0.9m. It had a small high level window and a solid door with a light above it. There was a metal barrel for use as a toilet in the corner of additional section. The delegation also saw a disciplinary cell in the women’s quarter. It measured 2 sq.m. (with a ceiling height for around 3 m), and had no toilet or running water. It had a small window and a solid metal door, which was locked when the delegation arrived. The Chief gendarme had the key. 239.The director said that for prisoners in the disciplinary cell, as for all others, there was a daily provision of one meal per day and the food could be supplemented from relatives outside. Women detainees reported that it was rare for women to be placed in the disciplinary cell, and that, when it happened, it was only for a few days at most. 240.The director also spoke of the system of prisoner self-management, indicating that cautions could be given out by prisoners for minor matters, but no disciplinary sanctions. If the case were serious enough to warrant a disciplinary penalty, the matter was referred to the prison management. The director at Cotonou Prison stated that the detainees were not informed on arrival of the internal rules applying in prison. 241.At Abomey Prison, the director reported that official punishments included denial of free circulation within the prison (confinement to a room) and placement in one of the two disciplinary cells. Women detainees reported that shackles could be ordered as punishment by the Commandant de Brigade or by the director, and that a woman detainee was last shackled in November 2007 as a disciplinary sanction for fighting. Male detainees reported confinement in the disciplinary cells and use of shackles. 242.The delegation was concerned to learn that the self-governing system operated by prisoners inside the prisons of Cotonou and Abomey appeared to include punishments by the prisoners in charge imposed on prisoners deemed to have transgressed the unwritten rules of the prison community. Prisoners interviewed described the normal procedure for placement in the disciplinary cells as starting with a beating followed by cellular confinement. They explained that the procedure was adopted by the gendarmes, for example in respect of prisoners attempting to escape, or by the chief prisoner, who was given the key to the disciplinary cell by the gendarmes. Prisoners reported that sometimes the prisoners in the disciplinary cells were placed in shackles (entraves); prisoners thought that this required the permission of the prison administration. Some detainees also reported that prisoners had been handcuffed to a tree in the main yard for extended periods of time. 243. The SPT recommends that no prisoner be employed or given authority in the prison in any disciplinary capacity. The SPT further recommends that the use of shackles be discontinued and that restraints not be applied to prisoners while in disciplinary cells. 244.At Akpro-Missérété Prison, the delegation observed two sets of disciplinary cells (24 in total). Each cell measured 2 sq.m., and let in some natural air and light through cuts in the walls. Each cell had a urinal and a tap, which did not work, as well as an artificial light. According to the director and the chef brigade, detainees can be kept in the cells for minor offences from 1 hour to 8 days. The keys to the cell are kept with the gendarme. Upon examining the main courante register, where some sanctions appeared to be recorded, it became clear that no time of entry or removal from disciplinary cells was indicated, which made it impossible to ascertain how long prisoners are kept in these cells. Both the director and the adjudant-chef reported that new arrivals to the prison are told of the rules and the sanctions as a deterrent. However, interviews with detainees revealed that some did not know the rules. 245.The delegation found that there was no official register of sanctions at any of the prisons visited. By letter of 7 November 2008, the authorities informed the SPT that disciplinary sanctions were imposed by the registrars on detainees who disturbed other detainees, and that statistics on these complaints were not available. The SPT emphasizes that all proceedings concerning sanctions should be strictly recorded, with details of the reasons, date, nature and duration of the penalty and authorization. 246. The SPT recommends that all disciplinary procedures be authorized and implemented by the prison administration