2.1 VISITS TO RETIREMENT HOMES 2.1.2 Regular visit to the Pegasus Home in Rogaška Slatina (31 July 2019) The purpose of this unannounced visit was to examine whether the home had a secure ward or another type of ward where individual residents are restricted in their freedom to leave the ward or the home; what the conditions were in such a ward; whether the provisions of the Mental Health Act (ZDZdr) were observed; possible use of special protection measures (SPM) and the treatment of residents. Based on the clarifications of the home’s management and staff, interviews with residents and the findings of the NPM members who also examined the ward, the NPM gave 17 recommendations. We particularly highlight recommendations regarding the installation of bedside reading lights, decoration of common areas and residents’ rooms, suitable distribution of information for residents (also) on new notice boards, recording responses to emergency calls (emergency buttons), maintenance of devices, adjustment of the form by means of which an individual gives their consent to be accommodated on the secure ward as per the provisions of the ZDZdr, and regarding the conduct of the admittance procedure. The home’s management responded to the recommendations, and it was evident from their reply that they have already realised 13 recommendations, and plan to realise the remaining four. 2.1.3 Control visits 2.1.3.1 Control visit to Horjul Retirement Centre (20 March 2019) During the previous visit to this institution in 2017, the NPM made 20 recommendations. On the occasion of this visit, it was found that the centre accepted and realised seven recommendations, which is commendable. Among other things, the centre improved the ventilation in rooms and provided more suitable storage of cleaning preparations and notification of activities (particularly at weekends), and it also arranged individual records. We nevertheless stressed that the centre accepted nine recommendations but has not yet realised them (these involved the residents’ living conditions). We expressed our expectation that the centre will pay special attention to these recommendations and their realisation in the future. We were especially surprised that four recommendations were not accepted. These recommendations referred to the harmonisation of the legal notice in the statement on consent to accommodation in the secure ward with the provisions of the ZDZdr, suitable legal basis for detention in the secure ward, and the prompt submission of proposals to extend detention. It must be emphasised that one recommendation was intended for the MDDSZ (regarding suitable presentation of representatives of persons with mental health disorders), which is of particular concern. We expressed expectation that the centre and the Ministry would adopt the relevant recommendations, and actively work towards realising them as soon as possible. Four new recommendations were given during this visit, of which (according to its response), the centre has already realised three. The recommendation that the centre establish an effi- 32 THE REPORT OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS OMBUDSMAN OF THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA ON IMPLEMENTING THE TASKS OF THE NPM