Annual report 2011: Spain’s National Preventive Mechanism various opinions were expressed Three detainees at the Central Registry of Detainees in Madrid claimed to have been mistreated at the stations from which they had been transferred. None of them provided an injury report or evidence of having called for medical attention Procedure for Action 26433 at the GC HQ in Almería is highlighted as a good practice The objects on display in the room at the Provincial Information Brigade establishment in Madrid were detainees are initially processed may be taken as intimidatory 64  Aluche”. Other detainees at various establishments also said that they had been properly treated: “They’ve treated me right. I think the way they treat you depends on how you treat them. If you show respect they usually do the same”; “I’ve been treated very well ... everything is fine”; “the officers have treated me very correctly”. However other detainees complained at the treatment received: “Some of them ought to be given psychological tests”; “arrogant, cocky, rude … the way the guards treat you leaves a lot to be desired, because we’re not all bad people, we’re not dogs”; “arrogant and stroppy”; “yes, stroppy in their attitudes”; “humiliating treatment”; “Very poor treatment. Threatening, shouting …”; “Treated as if we were rats”. Some detainees also referred to how other detainees were treated and complained of poor treatment of foreigners and people with drug addiction problems: “Yes, there was an Arab who was badly treated”; “They don’t treat everyone alike, especially if you’re poor or an addict”; “they discriminate against drug addicts”; “Not everyone gets the same treatment: it depends on the officer and on the addict”. Finally at the interviews held at the Central Registry of Detainees in Madrid three people claimed to have suffered mistreatment at the district police stations from which they had been transferred. In two cases this was the Carabanchel district station in Madrid. One stated as follows: “at the police station in Carabanchel they mistreat you, they don’t feed you. They hit me and I had nothing to eat for 25 hours”. Both interviewees reported that they had been shackled to a wall for around 12 hours at the said station, and had suffered blows and mistreatment of various types. One of them was examined by a medical professional who was with the inspection visit team from the office of the Ombudsman, and was found to have scratches and an erythematous rash of recent origin on the ankles. This rash was visible to the naked eye but its origin was very difficult to determine. The third interviewee failed to identify the station at which the mistreatment had taken place, and referred to injury reports as follows: “the medical treatment is OK but you can see that they’re under pressure or afraid ... you only get an injury report from time to time. And the police hold on to the report”. However none of these persons provided an injury report or referred to having called for medical treatment. In terms of the treatment of detainees, the safety, security and action procedure for holding areas in place at the GC headquarters in Almería is worth highlighting. It is known as “Procedure for Action nº 26433”, and is available for consultation by personnel on custodial duty. On the inspection visit to the Provincial Information Brigade establishment in Madrid it was observed that in the meeting room usually used to hold detainees for initial processing and for reading them their rights there were two display cabinets containing items confiscated in the course of the Brigade’s operations, such as Molotov cocktails, explosive devices with timers, balaclavas and throwing stars thrown during demonstrations. In this regard, the Ombudsman has   THE OMBUDSMAN OF SPAIN