Moreover, documentary management is very inadequate: information documents are incomplete or out-of-date, and placement records are not kept with any strictness. On a final note, the judicial authority never visits these premises. At Basel-Mulhouse Airport, the unfortunately far from occasional haziness surrounding the management of holding areas is compounded by the binational management of the airport, located on French soil: the existence of a Swiss holding area in the airport is contested by the French authorities, such that the foreign nationals placed in this area face an uncertain fate. For practical reasons, the Bobigny Court of first instance in civil and criminal matters (TGI) has gained an external hearing room near the Roissy waiting area (ZAPI), located right within the Roissy freight area, in a poorly indicated, isolated place that is difficult to get to. The aim of this new organisation is to improve the conditions in which the people being held are received and their defence is exercised during their hearing, as they no longer have to travel in poor transport conditions and endure the long waiting times in undignified conditions at the Bobigny Court itself. But significant problems persist, in terms of accessing the building and reception of the public, which are key principles for a place of justice so as to ensure the principle of public hearings is honoured, and underpin effective exercise of rights of defence. The security surrounding this place of justice, ensured by the border police, is somewhat problematic for the principle of public hearings and the right to a fair trial: access to the hearing room is regulated and supervised by officials who are defendants in the proceedings and tasked with implementing the deportation measure. Above all, the location of the hearing room itself (the outbuilding of the TGI is located in the same building as the waiting area) also raises questions over the necessary apparent impartiality of justice. Furthermore, the day-to-day cooperation between the liberty and custody judges, waiting area staff and border police officers – who end up working closely together while performing their respective duties – could, quite justifiably, give the people held there the impression of partial justice. 3.1.3 Forced removals By air Escorts talk and work with the people being removed in an effort to create a stress-free atmosphere, without masking the firmness which would involve "applying the right amount of force necessary" when required. Such behaviour is evidently to do with the desire to succeed the deportation policy, but respect for the people being removed does appear to be genuine. More careful judgment should nevertheless be demonstrated in the use of restraint methods, since the "properly boarded" principle should not eclipse the need for restraint methods that are proportionate to the behaviour of the people being removed, and which should not be used systematically. Local deportation blocks (ULE) are not fit for accommodating people for long periods of time. Although the Roissy local deportation block has moved and its new premises appear to be in good condition and more suitable than previously, there is no material provision for people being removed within the premises visited. The foreign nationals are not offered a snack or the opportunity to have a shower - even when such facilities exist. No toiletries kit or spare clothes are handed out. In one case where a family was being deported, it appeared that the breakfast served in the detention facility for illegal immigrants was not enough, and no food had been provided after lunch, when the plane landed at 9pm local time (midnight in Paris) and supper had nevertheless been provided upon arrival for the crew and staff of the escort team. Contacts with the outside (lawyer, family) are not allowed at this stage of the removal process, from the moment the foreign nationals have left the detention centre or facility. 27