Annual Report 2015 - Spain’s National Preventive Mechanism Testimonies of ill treatment §150 and 151 AR 2014 42.  The main concern of the NPM in its visits to CP is the testimony of inmates who state having suffered ill treatment. When these types of complaints are received, approval is sought from the persons affected to initiate the corresponding investigation by the Security and Justice Department of the Ombudsman which, where appropriate, begins proceedings with the Administration in order to clarify the facts. This was the case with regard to the follow-up visit to the Madrid VI-Aranjuez CP, where an incident was brought to light which occurred that same morning. According to reports, an inmate had attempted to bite a member of staff and was mechanically restrained due to their state of agitation. The person involved was an inmate who was affected by a spinal injury and who had already been interviewed by the NPM during previous visit to this CP. That interview led to an ex officio file being opened due to the shortcomings observed in relation to the cleanliness of the cell in which the inmate was subjected to solitary confinement. Having been moved to the solitary confinement wing, the representatives of the Ombudsman conducted an interview with the inmate. According to the inmate’s testimony, he was subjected to various assaults whilst already handcuffed and restrained, and during his transfer to the solitary confinement wing he had also been struck. Following the interview, the records of the monitoring of the mechanical restraining of the inmate were requested, as well as any recordings which existed of the restraining. The camera in the mechanical restraint cell was not equipped with a recording system, but it was possible to access images of the transfer of the inmate from his unit of origin to the solitary confinement wing. After the visit, the Security and Justice Department of this institution began proceedings with the Secretary-General of Prison Institutions (Spanish acronym SGIP) directed towards determining the origin, development and consequences of the facts, in particular with respect to the ill treatment that the detainee stated having undergone. The SGIP responded with a different version of events, communicating that the corresponding Prison Security Tribunal as well as the Magistrate’s Court had become aware of these. The proceedings initiated by the Ombudsman are currently on hold, since Pre-trial Investigation Court No.2 in Aranjuez is hearing investigative proceedings into the facts, following the complaints lodged both by the inmate as well as by various workers who were injured as a result of the incident. When inmates do not wish to report incidents, the NPM proceedings focus on urging the prison authorities to immediately initiate the necessary proceedings to clarify the facts, even when there is no formal complaint but where there are indications that an act of this nature may have been committed. This should be effected primarily by the establishment itself and later by the specialist units of the central prison services. Visits to Sevilla II and Brians I CP 54 This was the case for the visits to the Sevilla II and Brians I CP, where a selection of inmates subjected to methods of restraint, and who alluded to having suffered ill treatment when said methods were used, were interviewed confidentially. During the examination of documentation in the Sevilla II CP, injury reports were also found which, in the section relating to inmates’ allegations, affirmed that they had been assaulted by members of