the contacts with their lawyer(s)). Moreover, the use of modern technology (such as free-of-charge Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) services) may help prisoners to maintain contact with their families and other persons. 60. In certain countries, the CPT observed that, according to the applicable rules, certain restrictions were imposed on all remand prisoners as a matter of policy, for instance, a total ban on telephone calls, visits or the obligation to receive visits only under closed conditions (i.e. through a glass partition). In the CPT’s view, applying such restrictions indiscriminately to all remand prisoners is not acceptable; any restrictions must be based on a thorough individual assessment of the risk which prisoners may present. 61. Further, in a number of countries, remand prisoners are obliged to request authorisation from a judge or prosecutor for every single visit. In this regard, the CPT considers that remand prisoners should be entitled to receive visits (and make telephone calls) as a matter of principle, rather than these being subject to authorisation by a judicial authority. Any refusal in a given case to permit such contacts should be specifically substantiated by the needs of the investigation, require the approval of a judicial authority and be applied for a specific period of time. If it is considered that there is an ongoing risk of collusion, particular visits (or telephone calls) can be monitored. 62. The CPT has repeatedly come across situations where far-reaching restrictions are imposed on remand prisoners by judicial authorities, in the interests of an ongoing criminal investigation. Such restrictions may entail a total prohibition of contacts with the outside world (except with the lawyer) combined with segregation from all other prisoners, the result being that the prisoners are held for a certain period under conditions amounting to solitary confinement. The CPT acknowledges that there may be justification, in an individual case, for keeping a given remand prisoner apart from certain other prisoners or, in even more exceptional circumstances, from prisoners in general, and for restricting his/ her contact with the outside world. However, in the CPT’s view, the starting point for devising regimes for remand prisoners must be the presumption of innocence and the principle whereby prisoners must not be subject to more restrictions than are strictly necessary to ensure that they are incarcerated without risk and that the interests of justice are duly served. Any restrictions should be kept to a minimum and last for as short a time as possible. Whatever the circumstances, restrictions should never be applied for the purpose of bringing pressure to bear on persons remanded in custody in order to induce them to co-operate with the justice system. Placement in solitary confinement (or in conditions which in practice amount to this) must be resorted to only in exceptional situations and where there is direct evidence of a serious threat to the course of justice if the person concerned associates with particular individuals or other persons in general. 63. Decisions imposing restrictions described in the previous paragraph should normally be taken when the remand prisoner appears in court and be subject to appeal in a separate procedure. The written decision should provide reasons for every restriction imposed and should be given to the prisoner concerned and/or his/her lawyer. The restrictions must be reviewed by the competent court on a Remand detention ► Page 35