there was nothing to report. However, as indicated in section C. 11 (a) para 117 below, the material conditions in the gendarmerie in themselves would have necessitated comments and recommendations. 103.The delegation was informed by representatives of the Ministry of Defence that, in theory, judges and members of the Constitutional Court can conduct unannounced visits to gendarmeries. It would appear however that internal and external systems for regular unannounced checks by the police/gendarmes hierarchy and prosecutor’s office, respectively, are not in place. The state of the records in law enforcement facilities would, in the event of such monitoring visits, provide no firm basis on which to assess the legality of custody or observance of legal time limits; the conditions of custody would however by clear to any inspector going into cells and talking with persons held. The SPT recommends that the law enforcement services introduce an internal system of regular monitoring of initial custody covering both legal aspects and material conditions of detention. This should operate in parallel with the monitoring to be carried by the NPM, once it is established. 104. With the advent of the NPM, the SPT expects the development of a proactive and regular programme of independent visits to police and gendarme facilities to ensure that the safeguards against ill-treatment are functioning well in practice; such regular visits, including unannounced visits, to police and gendarmeries should include interviews in private with detainees as well as discussions with staff. 10.Adolescent children deprived of their liberty 105.The delegation met few adolescent children in initial custody. Staff informed the delegation that children could be questioned and could make statements without the presence of a parent or other trusted adult. There were no special detention facilities for children at the law enforcement establishments visited. Staff confirmed that children were held with adults, although reportedly women were normally not placed in the holding cells, unless there was a particular security issue. 106.At Cotonou Central Police Commissariat, the delegation interviewed an adolescent detainee under 18 years of age from Niger who was unable to communicate properly with police staff. When the delegation met him he had been in one of the holding cells with adults since the previous day. It proved impossible to check from the register how long he had been held. He was listed as being 12 years old. The adolescent detainee’s mobile telephone had been confiscated and he had been unable to contact his family. He could not remember his brother’s telephone number for notification and only after the delegation’s intercession was he allowed to have his mobile, to find his brother’s number. Finally, under police supervision, he was allowed to call his brother, who arranged to come to the central police station. The delegation was informed that the adolescent detainee was subsequently released into the custody of his brother the next day. 107.At the Gendarmerie in Séhoué, the delegation spoke to an adolescent detainee who had been brought to the police station the previous evening; he reported not having received any water or food since he had been placed in the cell, and having been handcuffed behind his back the whole night until earlier that morning. The SPT views this restraining of an adolescent detainee with handcuffs overnight, while locked in the cell as inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment. No person should be handcuffed in custody without a valid grave security reason. Any such handcuffing or use of other restraints should be fully recorded in the relevant register and include the security reason and length of the use of the restraint. 108.The adolescent detainee also said that he had been threatened by one of the gendarmes and that he had been told that, although he would be released later that day, he would be beaten first to teach him a lesson. Children in the criminal justice system are especially vulnerable. Every attempt should be made to avoid deprivation of liberty of children and to ensure that initial custody is used as a last resort. The safeguards applying to all persons deprived of liberty should apply a fortiori to children. 109. The SPT recommends that the authorities take steps to ensure: T hat children are not held in initial custody exc ept as a genuinely last resort T hat children a re held separately from adults T hat their rights are fully and clearly explained to children in a way th at is readily understandable T hat a relative or trusted person is immediately informed of the custody of the child concerned T hat no child is subjected to questioning without the presence of a trusted adult T hat no child is subjected to restraint while in a custody ce ll 11.Material conditions in gendarmeries and police facilities 110.The delegation observed that material conditions varied from acceptable to appalling, as a result of lack of access to sanitation, complete darkness in some cells, very rare access to showers, absence of any kind of bedding, and the lack of provision of food to detainees. (a)Cells 111.The Compagnie de Gendarmerie de Cotonou, Brigade de Territoriale de Godomey had two holding cells. The delegation was informed that the normal capacity was 10 persons but, depending upon the fluctuation of persons held, each cell might hold up to 20. The first tiled cell was 15 sq.m. (3m x 5m x 3m) and was dirty and very dark, as the only artificial light was broken and a barred opening (approximately 40 cm x 80 cm, 2.5m from the floor of the cell) let in no light and very little air. The cell was humid and