also mentioned trials (interpreting contract, translation tablets, document containing useful pictograms, interpreting agreement with ISM Interprétariat of the Paris and Bordeaux Interregional Directorate for Prison Services, etc.). A contract which will enable all institutions to access a telephone interpreting service in as a broad a range of languages as possible is currently being drafted. On a final note, the Minister of Justice clarifies that the Code of criminal procedure provides that use of an interpreter only serves a purpose when absolutely necessary, if the prisoner does not speak or understand French and there is no one on-site able to provide a translation. The CGLPL duly notes these steps forward but maintains that the provision of the Code of criminal procedure concerning interpreters is too restrictive in its view, insofar as it implicitly authorises reliance on fellow prisoners for translations. This is a practice that should be avoided in all circumstances, especially during interviews bearing on medical or criminal matters. Avoid reliance on fellow prisoners as interpreters in all circumstances and prohibit this outright for interviews bearing on medical or criminal matters and any administrative measure subject to an adversarial procedure beforehand, with the sole exception of emergency medical care. 3.4.3 Processing of appeals The CGLPL had recommended systematically renewing correspondence stationery free of charge, providing touch terminals for entering appeals featuring pictograms, training new arrivals in how to use them, monitoring the processing of appeals through automatic alerts, issuing acknowledgements of receipt, accepting spoken appeals and appointing correspondents who are able to respond directly or forward appeals to the competent department and above all to explain how the procedure works. These recommendations predate the broad-scale roll-out of the GENESIS software. The Minister of Justice explains that traceability of appeals is ensured in the GENESIS program, which has now been rolled out across all penal institutions, either by the prison staff (from appeals submitted orally or on a piece of paper), or directly by the prisoners themselves on the touch terminals. Appeals are not confidential. An acknowledgement of receipt intended for the prisoner, particularly indicating an average processing time, is "possible", as is the publication of a document indicating the initial appeal and the response given by the service concerned. Lastly, she contends that the prison administration departments and prison rehabilitation and probation services are being vigilant in this regard and that instructions have been given to ensure the situation of people experiencing language difficulties is taken into account, and that digital technology in prisons should test out the possibility of electronic referrals. Regarding correspondence stationery, a kit containing a pen, paper, envelopes and stamps is systematically handed out to each new arrival. The necessary supplies can then be accessed via the canteens or renewed whenever necessary for indigent prisoners. The CGLPL had, moreover, recommended systematically identifying vulnerable prisoners who do not make any requests known. The Minister of Justice indicates that the prison authorities are vigilant regarding instances where prisoners withdraw into themselves or shut others out, particularly by systematising single multidisciplinary committees (management, prison rehabilitation and probation services, medical departments, psychiatric departments). The CGLPL nevertheless finds, during its inspections, that GENESIS is still not sufficiently used to record appeals. Likewise, it finds that tools enabling people experiencing language difficulties to express their requests are few and far between. More widely roll out the use of GENESIS for managing appeals and take advantage of the "digital technology in prisons" programme to set up appeal tools for use by prisoners experiencing language difficulties. 59