Opinion of 22nd May 201259 concerning the number of prisoners 1/ Data concerning the number of prisoners give cause for concern and attract a great deal of attention, in particular from the authorities, which is why the contrôle général des lieux de privation de liberté has not until now considered it appropriate to publish an opinion exclusively dedicated to a subject which has often been studied by national leaders60 and various international authorities.61 Furthermore, drawing inspiration from the assessments of the European Court of Human Rights,62 French judges have already found the State to be liable in this area.63 Finally, the question was, in a certain manner, settled by the Penitentiary law of 24th  November 200964 which provides that “cells shall be suitable for the number of prisoners accommodated in them” (article  716 of the Code of Criminal Procedure). The contrôle général was all the less inclined to assert its own point of view since the difficulties of the national prison system are not accurately reflected by the number of persons imprisoned, when taken in isolation, while unfortunately being too often reduced to the latter consideration. However the current scale of prison overcrowding and the size of the growth thereof calls for an analysis of its causes in order to distinguish Published in the Journal Officiel de la République française of 13th June 2012, text n°86. cf. for example the proposition de loi [“private member’s bill”] of Messrs Raimbourg et al., n°2 753 (amended) of 13th July 2010. 61 cf. for example the Report by Mr Alvaro Gil-Robles, Commissioner for Human Rights, on the effective respect for human rights in France, following his visit from 5th to 21st September 2005, Strasbourg, 15th February 2006, in particular §§ 70 to 81; the various reports of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture, including the most recent to date, following its visit to France of 28th November to 10 th December 2010, adopted on 8th July 2011 (§§ 59 and 60). 62 In particular, ECtHR, 26th October 2000, Kudla v. Pologne, in Les grands arrêts de la CEDH [“Major Rulings of the ECtHR”], 5th ed., n°14, p.152, §94; 6th March 2001, Dougoz v. Greece, n°40907/98 (Sect. 3), ECtHR 2001-II, §46; 19th April 2001, Peers v. Greece, n°28524/95 (Sect. 2) ECtHR 2001-III, §72. 63 For example, Administrative Court of Appeal (CAA) of Douai (1st ch.) 12th November 2009, n°09DA00782; ord. pdt. [order by the presiding judge] CAA Douai, 26th April 2012, n°11DA01130. 64 French penitentiary law n°2009-1436 of 24th November 2009: http://www. legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000021312171&categorieLien =id (in French). 59 60 119