56 he wanted to eat upon his arrival at the Police Department. He also had to state if he had any special requirements in connection with his health condition, diet, or religious belief. Since he was very distressed in this–unusual to him–situation, he gave a negative answer. He told the visiting delegation that the policemen had listened to all of his questions and given him substantive answers. He had no complaint whatsoever about his arrest, conditions of custody, treatment, or the policemen’s behavior. Between October 1 and December 6, 2016, arrestees lodged complaints with the Police Department about the conditions of their placement on six occasions. In four cases, they complained about the degrading stripping in the custody room; in the other two cases, they complained about the unjustified arrest and its duration, as well as about the lack of food and something to drink. According to the complaints about stripping, after their arrest, the detainees, one by one, had to take off their clothes, drop their pants, squat on their heels and cough, as a result of which their private parts and anuses would become visible to the person conducting the inspection. They felt aggrieved at this situation they found degrading and humiliating. It is clear that the objective of making the naked complainants squat on their heels was to find objects hidden not in their clothes but on their body, between their legs, in their private parts, or in their anuses; the policemen conducting the inspection acted in excess of their power, they submitted the arrestees to a body search not applicable in the case of persons taken into police custody. Searching not only the clothes of the arrestees but also their uncovered bodies, including their private parts and anuses,174 the staff members of the Police Department conducting the inspection applied the much stricter rules of lock-up reception175 instead of the rules of taking into custody. 176 The method of executing a measure with no legal foundation, especially making the complainants squat on their heels with their lower body uncovered, induced shame in the persons concerned, resulting in an impropriety related to the prohibition of degrading treatment and the right to personal security. Pursuant to Articles 10 and 16 of the UN Convention against Torture, each State Party shall ensure that education and information regarding the prohibition against torture are fully included in the training of all personnel who may be involved in the custody, interrogation or treatment of any individual subjected to any form of arrest, detention or imprisonment. According to the staff members of the Police Department, they had no training sessions whatsoever on the treatment and human rights of detainees, managing conflicts and aggression. They had monthly, four-hour training sessions held by a tactical instructor on the application of means of restraint, securing a location, using collective force, and narcotic drugs. In my report, I requested the Commander of the Metropolitan Police Headquarters of Budapest to ensure that persons taken into custody by the staff of the Police Departments under his supervision could notify themselves their relatives and that the rules of lock-up reception should not be applied in their cases. I also suggested that the Metropolitan Police Headquarters of Budapest should organize training sessions on the treatment and human rights of detainees, managing conflicts and aggression for the staff of the Police Departments under his supervision.177 I elaborated on my concerns about inspecting body cavities making the subject squat in my report № AJB-3685/2016 See Section 18 Subsections (4)-(6) of the Police Act 176 See Section 31(7) of the Staff Regulations 177 The report is registered in my Office under file number AJB-1522/2018 174 175