CAT/OP/BRA/3 conditions of detention. Self-governance appeared to be most prevalent in places of detention where criminal gangs assumed responsibility for delegating authority. These unlawful structures of control increase the likelihood that individuals deprived of their liberty will be subjected to systematic ill-treatment and torture, or even killed, and that the perpetrators of such acts will benefit from impunity. 43. The Subcommittee observed that a more pervasive atmosphere of fear and repression was present in places of detention where self-governance was more pronounced, and that key holders controlled wings with the knowledge of the prison authorities. Key holders attempted to obstruct the delegation’s interviews of detainees whenever possible, attempting to intimidate interviewees through their nearby presence. Self-governing regimes established with the tacit permission of the State foment terror among inmates, who become particularly vulnerable to ill-treatment by other inmates and have no recourse. 44. The Subcommittee recommends that: (a) Penitentiary authorities ensure adequate staffing in prisons and hire sufficient security guards who receive appropriate salaries, to ensure that inmates are supervised by State personnel, not by other inmates; (b) Clear administrative measures are taken to stop delegation of authority to inmates and to discipline those attempting to control other inmates or assign tasks that are typically carried out by prison staff; (c) Plans to privatize prisons be carefully weighed and, if implemented, should include vigorous training programmes and safeguards such as adequate supervision and monitoring to prevent self-governance among inmates. D. 1. Material conditions of detention Overcrowding 45. As during its previous visit, the Subcommittee observed that in nearly all of the male detention facilities it visited, occupancy far exceeded intended capacity. According to the Government’s 2014 report, the average rate of occupancy in Brazilian prisons was 161 per cent of capacity. Although the report noted that almost one third of facilities in Brazil had not reached full capacity, 24 per cent of facilities were reported as having an occupancy rate of over 20 per cent of capacity. The Subcommittee visited Raimundo Vidal Pessoa prison, a pretrial detention centre in Manaus that housed 691 individuals, well beyond its capacity of 250. The Subcommittee was informed by a government representative in one state that severe overcrowding in local jails is typical. A juvenile detention facility the Subcommittee visited housed almost twice the number of detainees it was designed to accommodate. Similarly, the Everardo Luna Centre for Criminal Observation and Screening in Recife held 2,473 individuals, more than twice its intended capacity of 952. The Ary Franco prison has an intended capacity of 958 but housed 1,731 individuals at the time of the Subcommittee’s visit. Although in its prior report, the Subcommittee drew attention to the urgent need to take action at Ary Franco, this facility has not been renovated or refurbished since then. One of the female detention facilities visited (Joaquim Ferreira de Souza jail, in the Gericinó prison complex) was also overpopulated, with 546 inmates against an intended capacity of 400. According to figures provided by the Government, between 2011 and 2015, the number of inmates in the State of Rio de Janeiro increased by 53 per cent and was not met with a corresponding increase in capacity. 46. In some facilities, the Subcommittee observed inhuman and degrading treatment in the form of severe overcrowding combined with extremely poor material conditions, a lack of clean water and ventilation, an atmosphere of fear of violence and a lack of access to 11