OPINIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE FRENCH CGLPL the hazards related to returning to the place of imprisonment by the deadlines (some are obviously related to the persons in question). Generally, the rate of failure of partial release, either due to revocation by the magistrate or due to escape, was 24% in one centre visited and 15% in another. This rate of failure would be reduced by improving the adaptation of partial release to the realities of the activity imposed. 7/ Partial release can only be granted if the persons to whom it applies have the necessary papers for getting a job. The practice of prefectures, which consists of not renewing the residence permits of foreign prisoners who are legitimate residents at the time of their imprisonment and whom, it is assumed, intend to remain in France, effectively deprives some of these foreigners from the option of benefiting from a partial-release measure (with no current residence permit, no job is possible, therefore no employment plan can be approved by the judge). This is a case of discrimination that has no justification with regard to the criminal penalty. It must be ended. 8/ Discipline in the sections or centres is obviously much less disrupted than under ordinary detention circumstances. They often contain disciplinary cells, that certain managements, questioned on this point, refuse to call as such and call “waiting cells”. They are used to hold persons who are detained when they return in a state of intoxication or if they commit offences (violence) during their hours of release, while they are waiting to be placed in custody, or in case of disorder (making a noise, damage, …) on the premises, or when the judge has been requested to revoke partial release and the persons in question are waiting to be transferred to a prison (usually) or a detention centre. These confinements occur without any disciplinary procedure, simply by administrative decision, most often upon return from work in the evening. These confinements can only be seen as either preventive measures, meaning confinement in a discipline cell by the head of the institution or his/her agent while waiting for the meeting of the discipline commission, in accordance with the provisions of article R. 57-7-18 of the code of criminal procedure; or the immediate return to ordinary detention decided by the head of the institution in application of article D.  124 of the same code. But, in the first case, none of the guarantees of the disciplinary procedure are applicable; in the second case – the most probable – the reintegration period and its conditions 136