Mínimum criteria in deprivation of liberty safeguards granted by penitentiary legislation to convicts would be seriously weakened. 181. Regardless of the criterion of this institution, since in practice CP use article 75.1 RP to impose regimental limitations similar to punishment of isolation or the closed regime, without the same procedural safeguards, their application is reviewed in depth at the visits. In any case, the exceptional and secondary nature of such measures should be observed, in addition to the procedure established in the internal operating instructions established by the penitentiary authorities themselves. 182. Indeed, the application of article 75.1 RP should be limited only to facts that, given their seriousness, jeopardise the safety and order of the prison, and to cases in which other less damaging measures may not be adopted or a fast processing of the disciplinary proceeding cannot be carried out to achieve the sought objectives in a manner affording greater safeguards to the inmate. 183. With regard to the procedure, the specific grounds for application of article 75.1 RP and the regimental limitations it implies (changes of unit, greater security measures, restriction of the right to privacy, to go out to the yard and participate in activities, etc.) should be expressly evidenced both in the decision of the management ordering it, and in the notifications to the penitentiary surveillance judge, with the possibility of adversary statement by the inmate in question through an appeal. In addition, record should be kept of whether the inmate has been examined by the medical services. 184. At some CP, article 75.1 RP is applied with a frequency apparently inconsistent with the exceptional application that should in any case preside over the use of this measure. In addition, occasionally, the regimental limitations applied based on this article are extended over long time periods, of even over one month. Accordingly both the respective managements and the respective central services should proceed to review the application of said article. 185. The measure of article 75.2 RP, although for protection of the inmates, is in any case exceptional and implies regimental limitations. Accordingly, the proliferation in a CP of inmates requiring the protection contemplated in said article may be considered a sign or the abnormal operation of the internal separation system. In addition, a prolonged duration of the application of article 75.2 RP could imply that other measures to remedy the situation such as, for example, moving to another CP were not adopted. Accordingly, whenever possible, these measures should be used to reduce the number of times in which it is necessary to adopt the measure contemplated in article 75.2 RP. 186. The facilities used for isolation, provisional isolation or regimental limitations and personal protection measures, based on article 75 RP, should be adequate and have features similar to those of ordinary cells, particularly in those cases of long duration of the stay of the inmates. 75