Memo from D. D. – warder in the prison, medical certificate issued to G. P., search protocol for cell No 17, memo from V. A. – warder in the prison, and explanations from the prisoners in cell 17. The inspection team asked to see the records from the surveillance cameras in the corridor but found out that no such are installed in the corridor for foreigners. The inspection found undisputedly that on 17 October 2013 at approximately 8:30 am force and support devices have been used against the prisoners in cell No 17 – there were suffusions on the bodies of some of the prisoners. The reason for the use of force and support devices is failure to obey the verbal order given by the warder D. D. that the prisoners should come in front of the cell for a check upon handing over of the duty. The use of force and support devices is ordered by the chief warder on the grounds of art. 113, para 1, item 1 and art. 114, para 1, item 2 of the Law on Execution of the Sentences and Detention under Arrest. According to the NPM team the use of force is legal, but the inspection carried out failed to support explicit conclusion as to when the use of force has commenced and how long it continued - if the use of force has continued after the prisoners were forced out of the cell, then there would be clear disproportion in the use of force. With respect to the use of support devices the inspection team of the opinion that they were used against the law. Art. 114 of the LESDA comprehensively lists the cases when the use of support devices is allowed. None of the hypotheses regarding the use of support devices set out in the law were present in this specific case. The prisoners were passive all the time, while disobeying the order to go out of the cell. The Ombudsman, in the capacity as National Preventive Mechanism, gave recommendations to approve detailed procedures regarding the use of force, including: the different types of force that may be used; the circumstances in which each type of force may be used; staff members who have the right to use the different types of force; the level of powers required prior to the use of force; the reports to be drawn up after the use of force. The Bulgaria Law on Execution of Sentences and Detention under Arrest does not provide for such detailed definition of the types of force and circumstances when it may be used. Legislative amendments in this area are urgently required and the national Ombudsman recommends to the Minister of Justice to discuss and initiate such changes in the legal framework. The NPM also recommended that the Chief Director of CD ES should undertake steps for the training and debriefing of the personnel in all prisons on the hypotheses provided for in the law with respect to the use of support devices on the prisoners. The Ombudsman recommended to the Chief Director of GD ES to undertake steps for the installation of CCTV equipment in all corridors in the prisons thus ensuring the security of these spaces and guaranteeing a possibility to establish the objective truth during the investigation of similar incidents. 59