short time limits to be complied with upon penalty of inadmissibility (48 hours from notification of a deportation decision in which to file an appeal before the administrative courts). The CGLPL recalls that the law gives detained foreign nationals the right to support and access to the law without the formality of services offered by entities having the duty to provide information. Institutions should ensure that these contacts are facilitated. Whatever the type of procedure (administrative or legal) lack of autonomy seriously hinders the collection of documents to be produced in support of an application: certificate of accommodation, rent receipts, education certificates, medical certificate etc. The right to contact close relations for this purpose depends on the possibility of access to a telephone. A mobile phone may not be brought into a centre if it has a photographic attachment. In respect to the procedures to be completed with the outside world, this also is a hindrance to autonomy and the exercise of rights, in particular where a person arrives during a weekend and cannot acquire a telephone card to use the centre telephones. The CGLPL recalls the terms of its notice dated 10th January 2011 relating to the use of telephones by persons deprived of their liberty 126: in relation to foreign detainees "it is recommended that [mobile] phones be retained by their owners, these being advised where necessary that taking pictures is prohibited during their stay" Access to personal documents is in itself a problem: it is mandatory that official documents are retained at the registry, which also holds the administrative and judicial procedures originating the placement in detention without organising access to it. With or without the aid of accredited associations, detainees are therefore often reduced to making an appeal before the administrative court or to contest an extension before the JLD without being able to have access to all appropriate documents (for which the courts, generally, do not fail to reproach them). The CGLPL recommends that detainees should be able to access personal documents and procedural documents relating to them. Internal regulations should define, for each centre, actual communication procedures which will guarantee respect of private life and the protection of documents. Finally it has been found that lawyers did not travel to the CRAs and by definition imprisonment prevents detainees from going to their offices. In practice, meetings take place therefore in the court before hearings; their time, duration and quality depend on the number of files to be examined, and the number of lawyers appointed for legal advice. Certainly detainees are placed in a situation comparable to that of persons brought before a court after police custody where these too are given the opportunity to meet a lawyer during this period. The inspectors also observed that lawyers, when required to carry out successive defences of a number of persons could not conveniently play the role of explaining and advising for which in principle they are responsible at the start of the judgement (opportunities for appeal, organising departure etc.). Detainees are, at this stage, completely dependent on their escort and cannot just decide to wait until the lawyer is available to ask for appropriate information. The CGLPL recommends on the one hand that in the accommodation area a list of lawyers for bars which work for detainees should be posted and on the other hand that a system should be set up enabling detainees to have rapid, direct contact with a duty lawyer. 126 Journal officiel de la République française of 23rd January 2011 148