Long-term deprivation of liberty number of male and female inmates. Asked whether they were given information upon arrival regarding their rights and duties in the facility, more than half of those surveyed in Module 1 said they were not. Similarly, the majority of the inmates in both this module and in the women’s module said that the information was not clear and easy to understand; that it had not been provided in written form and in their language; that they were not allowed to keep a copy; and that there was no place where they could regularly view the information, in breach of Article 52 of the Prison Regulations. Finally, at the psychiatric prison hospital in Fontcalent (Alicante), we observed that inmates were provided with no written information on arrival regarding the characteristics of the facility and their rights and duties in it. 123.  Although in most of the prisons inspected during 2011 the inmates were verbally informed of the possibility of filing habeas corpus proceedings, this information was not furnished in writing (except in Barcelona men’s prison). Such a change would ensure that there was irrefutable evidence that this requirement had been complied with, as recommended last year. Paragraph 476 of the Annual Report 2010 states that persons involved in any situation of deprivation of liberty should be provided with written information on their statutory rights in such circumstances, including the right to habeas corpus, whenever legally applicable, and that this information is to be provided in a clear and concise manner that can be understood by someone who is not familiar with legal jargon. Except in Barcelona men’s 124.  In the specific case of the inspection visit made to the psychiatric prison hospital (HPP) at Fontcalent (Alicante), we considered it advisable to examine the court files of some of the inmates. The reasons were the particular vulnerability of the inmates, and because they are psychiatric patients requiring specialist care on whom a security measure had been imposed. We observed that a significant number of the patients had been placed in this facility for the crime of “attack against the public authorities” [atentado contra la autoridad], –in all likelihood as a consequence of their illness. This suggests that this sentence is being overutilised and also that there is a profound conceptual futility, from a psychiatric perspective, of detaining some of the patients in this facility. Our review of the files also revealed cases of persons declared to be immune from prosecution by a court, which had ordered that they should be placed in the psychiatric prison hospital instead; they were subsequently tried for crimes committed between the first offence (in which they were declared immune from prosecution) and their entry into the HPP. In other words, the judge had ruled that the patients were entirely immune from prosecution, but they were sentenced to an alternative measure which was added to the previous one, and their detention at the facility extended by the corresponding number of years. This type of sentencing reinforces the idea that the HPP is not viewed socially as an area of therapy or social protection, but rather as a form of punishment equivalent to prison for people with mental illnesses. In this regard we have informed the Ministry of Justice of the need to review the legal treatment of mental patients, who are deprived of The legal-penal treatment THE OMBUDSMAN OF SPAIN  prison, written information on habeas corpus proceedings is not provided of mental patients, deprived of liberty for long periods of time with no therapeutic grounds, needs to be revised  145