upon article L. 521-2 of the Administrative Law Code (Code de justice administrative)70, brought by the OIP71, in which several other corporations took part. In these circumstances, the Contrôleur Général des Lieux de Privation de Liberté deemed it necessary to carry out a certain number of verifications by means of an additional inspection of the institution. The latter was conducted between 23rd and 27th September 2013. It was a question of gauging the effect on the ground of the emergency recommendations and taking these changes into consideration in the inspection report that would follow up the first visit of the Contrôle Général’s teams to the institution, one year previously. On 18th October 2013, the Contrôleur Général passed on this inspection report to the minister of Justice. It was accompanied with a special examination reporting on the remedies applied to the situation described in the emergency recommendations. The most manifest effort made had been with regard to insalubrity. The prison was thus improved at the level of both the management of refuse (unfortunately, in particular by means of the installation of gratings on the windows depriving prisoners of daylight) and of the effect thereof in terms of the presence of dangerous materials (at the time of the second inspection, the inspectors noted a reduction in the presence of certain types of such materials, which had previously been strikingly present in the prison). The inspectors also noted that considerable effort had been made with regard to restoration of the cells to proper condition. Three operations had been undertaken: painting the walls, restoring the plumbing and electricity to proper condition and the installation of new windows. The inspection report drew up an inventory of the renovated cells and of their new condition. Although the work undertaken should give cause for satisfaction, the Contrôleur Général nonetheless points out his concern with regard to the non-permanent character of the funds and human resources devoted to renovation. The additional inspection also made it possible to stress that certain elements giving cause for concern ascertained in 2012 continue to exist: the level of violence and the number of transgressions committed in the prison remain high, there is still a high level of staff absenteeism (in spite of the readjustment of the organisation chart at last obtained by the management) and the very low level of activity in the workshops remains unchanged. These issues require far-reaching and continuous work in the long-term and a constant will to change the reality, which is notably and inexplicably lacking to date. 2.2 Actions taken in response to the Emergency Recommendations concerning the Two Young Offenders’ Institutions The recommendations made as a matter of urgency concerning Baumettes prison, and the echo to which they gave rise in the media, may have given the impression that the emergency procedure and the notion of “serious violation of fundamental rights” mentioned under article 9 of the Act of 30th October 2007 were reserved for cases in which the inspectors ascertained particularly shocking dilapidation of places of imprisonment72. The recommendations concerning 70 A summary application referred to as a “liberty” procedure, of which both the lower court judge and the appeal judge justified the urgency, thus confirming the point of view of the Contrôle Général. 71 The French section of the OIP international prisons watchdog (Observatoire international des prisons) had referred the state of Baumettes prison to the liberty procedures urgent applications judge of the administrative court of Marseille, with a request for several urgent measures to be ordered. 72 This was moreover also the case of the emergency recommendations concerning the prison of Nouméa inspected in December 2011. It has to be said that a dilapidated material condition of places of imprisonment lends itself particularly well to striking photographic illustration, which enables all to realise the degrading character that can be attached to the fact of living in certain places. One should make no mistake however: the fact that certain violations of rights are less easily shown in images does not make them any less serious for all that. 68