PARTIAL-RELEASE SCHEME (OPINION) are not associated with any detailed instructions and therefore no precautions. Therefore, no doctor comes to check the state of health of the person (article R.  57-7-31 of the Code): a conscientious head of an institution who wanted to call the emergency medical services for this purpose was unsuccessful in calling them out. Consequently, partial release also involves a reduction in the guarantees provided under general law to prisoners. This measure should be precisely regulated, by distinguishing punishment from waiting (one cannot be put in a disciplinary cell while waiting for custody or return to a prison), by specifying a maximum period of holding, the rights that the person concerned still has and, above all, by defining a subsequent procedure, adapted to these institutions, allowing the person concerned to defend themselves, all the more so as such a measure may have a serious effect on his/her external activity. Encouragement should also be given to the signature of protocols between the judicial authorities and the managements of the penal institutions concerned, for the awareness and handling of incidents that occur, for a better assessment of their gravity and more appropriate follow-up. 9/ Moreover, one must wonder whether discipline in places of partial release should not be relaxed, at least in the matter of objects or substances that are prohibited. Here is the list of the latter shown in the internal regulations on an open prison: “drugs, alcohol, canned soft drinks, portable telephones, cash, cassette recorders, DVD players, personal stereos [and necessary equipment], camera, hi-fi players, computers, hot plates, weight-training equipment, motorcycle helmet, food, coffee maker”. Although some of these restrictions are in place for obvious reasons, others are not. For some of these goods (money, computer) the aim is probably to avoid theft, which is widespread in these places. But why not leave it to the persons concerned to determine what they want to do with their own goods? Furthermore, although the prohibition on portable telephones is justified in an open wing included in a prison where these appliances are forbidden (on this point, the Contrôleur général requested a change in his/her opinion of 10th  January 2011 – Journal Officiel of 23rd  January), to prevent the risk of transmission from one section to another, it has no basis in independent open prisons. Lastly, although the question 137