serious manner, the interim liberty decision, provided for by Article L. 521-2 of the Administrative Justice Code, enables the court hearing applications for interim measures to order "all necessary measures for safeguarding" the fundamental liberty. In an order dated 28 April 201728, the Melun Administrative Court called for the adoption of a series of measures aimed at improving the institution's health situation and protecting prisoners from certain violations of their fundamental rights, pursuant to Articles 2, 3 and 8 of the ECHR: right to life, prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment and right to respect for private and family life. The court nevertheless rejected the most ambitious requests made to resolve the structural problems of overcrowding and dilapidated infrastructure - particularly the establishment of an overall emergency plan for the Fresnes remand prison. It ruled that such requests "are not among the emergency measures which the situation enables to be taken usefully and promptly" and that they could not therefore be recommended as part of an interim liberty decision. Referred an appeal regarding this decision, the Conseil d’État (Council of State) maintained, in its order of 28 July 201729, that the detention conditions within the Fresnes remand prison, "marked by a lack of space and privacy, are likely both to intrude on the prisoners' privacy to an extent exceeding the restrictions inherent in detention, and to expose them to inhuman or degrading treatment, thereby resulting in a serious violation of two fundamental liberties". It ultimately confirmed the administrative court's decision, however, and rejected the appeal which the OIP had referred to it. In justification, it particularly maintained that "with regard to their purpose, the injunctions requested, which bear on structural measures on the basis of the public policy choices unlikely to be made, and hence to have any immediate effect, are not among the emergency measures which the situation enables to be taken usefully under the powers invested in the court hearing applications for interim measures by Article L. 521-2 of the Administrative Justice Code." Moreover, it indicated that the clearly unlawful nature of the violation is assessed "with account taken of the means of the competent administrative authority and the measures (…) already taken". Following this decision, a campaign to appeal before the European Court of Human Rights has been initiated by the prisoners and their lawyers. This particularly raises the question of the effectiveness of the application for interim liberty measures at ending undignified detention conditions. France is at risk of being issued a new conviction by the Court of Strasbourg, since this procedure, given the case law of the Conseil d’État, is not likely to end detention conditions that are nevertheless considered at odds with Article 3 of the ECHR, which prohibits inhuman and degrading treatment. The CGLPL upholds all of the recommendations made in these emergency recommendations. The figures published by the Prison administration department show that, in 2017, overcrowding in the institution has not significantly decreased, since the occupancy rate in the remand prison wing on 1 December 2017 was 183.8% (188% on the day of the CGLPL's inspection of the institution). In light of the undignified detention conditions observed at Fresnes, the Government has a duty to give due consideration to past and future convictions and to take the appropriate measures to end the violations to fundamental rights observed in this institution. To date, the Chief Inspector has not received any information about the measures taken following the CGLPL's recommendations. In 2017 the Chief Inspector was yet again obliged, more than once, to refer to the institution's management cases of reported violations to prisoners' rights 28 29 Melun Administrative Court, 28 April 2017, OIP-SF, no. 1703085. Conseil d’État, Order of 28 July 2017, no. 410677. 75