Annual Report 2015 Regular supervision by the Commissions of Oversight The options available to the Commissions of Oversight to intervene when assessing the government's treatment of detainees are in the main of a preventive nature and are intended to prevent excesses and to effect a compromise between restriction of freedom and preparation for the future in freedom. In 2015, many Commissions were involved with the assessment of the implementation of the new system of promotion and degradation on the basis of the detainee's conduct. In so doing, they contributed to a rightful and predictable course of affairs. The sounding board group of the Commissions of Oversight for Penitentiary Institutions over the course of 2015 grew from being an observer to being a full participant in the NPM debate and consultations. Formally, the only mandate given to the sounding board group is to reproduce the joint impressions of and questions asked by the individual Commissions of Oversight to the other partners in the domain of penitentiary institutions. However, the sounding board group does play a part in spurring the individual Commissions of Oversight on. The sounding board group in this connection urged the DJI to obtain the annual reports of the Commissions of Oversight more quickly, allowing it to gain a better insight into the issues and complaints the Commissions are confronted with. The performance of a quantitative analysis - for instance, by charting the focuses and trends in supervision on the basis of the data collected - will in time allow the Commissions to be better able to contribute more significantly to improving the practical situation in penitentiary institutions and, thus, to the humane treatment of detainees. Investigation into signs of alleged abuses In addition to studying the consequences of the Masterplan, the Inspectorate VenJ also performed an investigation in connection with reports in the Telegraaf newspaper covering the Vught Penitentiary Institution (PI), which suggested that the institution would suffer from a crisis of authority, a cover-up culture and a security leak. The Inspectorate VenJ in August 2015 conducted an investigation among the institution's staff, covering two themes addressed in the newspaper articles. The Inspectorate VenJ also directly investigated a number of security aspects, like the access control at Vught PI and the High Security Ward located within its walls. The investigation did not not lead the Inspectorate VenJ to conclude that a security leak or a problematic authority culture existed. The Inspectorate VenJ found that Vught PI was upset by the media coverage, like the Telegraaf reports. The Inspectorate VenJ found that the management is in control and is transparent in its handling of the signs provided by the staff. The Inspectorate VenJ did, however, find some issues related to the authority culture and security, including staff access control, that required addressing. In the opinion of the Inspectorate VenJ, compliance with its recommendations would result in further optimisation of the institution's security. In his respons to the Inspectorate VenJ's report, the State Secretary announced that the institution would follow the recommendations. 13 Table of Cont