Report of the Human Rights Defender on the activities of the National Preventive Mechanism in Poland in 2014 it is the offense referred to in Article 79(2) of the Act. Given the foregoing, the representatives of the NPM recommend that the foregoing procedure be carried out, every time, upon consent of a resident or his/her legal guardian. The representatives of the NPM found that some establishments lacked residents’ declarations of consent to use their image175. It must be noted that the image is a good to which everyone is entitled, constituting his/her personal good under Article 23 of the Act of 23 April 1964 – Civil Code176, and a value protected under the Act of 4 February 1994 on copyright and related rights177, hereinafter referred to as the “Copyright Act”. As a personal good, the image is specially protected by law. Therefore, Article 81 of the Copyright Act lays down that, as a rule, the image may be disseminated upon consent of the person presented in it (or his/her legal guardian). In Case Reklos and Davourlis v Greece (Ref. 1234-1205) on photographing a child without parental knowledge or consent, the ECHR ruled that even the mere fact of taking a picture of someone and not publishing it can breach the right to privacy, thus effective protection of the person requires obtaining his/her consent at the time of taking the picture. Additionally, two centres did not take residents’ declarations of consent to process their personal data178. Pursuant to Article 1(1) of the Act of 29 August 1997 on personal data protection179, any person has a right to have his/her personal data protected. 5. Living conditions The visitors assessed living conditions ensured to residents of social care centres as positive. Their rooms were equipped with basic furniture and appliances, including those belonging to the residents, decorated so as to add a personal touch and make the residents feel just like home. Some centres were found to have defects180, involving peeling wall paint or furniture showing signs of wear. The visitors voiced their reservations about transition rooms in three establishments181. In the opinion of the representatives of the NPM, such accommodation does not ensure sufficient resting conditions and privacy to their residents. SCCs in: Bielsko-Biała, Jarosław, Siedlce, Wrocław (Holy Family SCC), Ruda Pilczycka, Częstochowa, Płaza. 176 Dz.U. of 2014, item 121, as amended. 177 Dz.U. of 2006, No 90, item 631, as amended. 178 SCCs in: Jarosław and Ruda Pilczycka. 179 Dz.U. of 2014, item 1182, as amended. 180 SCCs in: Maków Podhalański, Jarosław, Warsaw, Rzeszów, Wrocław (Holy Family SCC), Lębork (No 2), Wadowice, Częstochowa, Gościeradów, Płaza, Skarżysko-Kamienna. 181 SCCs in: Słupia Pacanowska, Wadowice and Gościeradów (palace). 175 54