statements and own-initiatives Lack of safety belts in police vans The Deputy-Ombudsman found that, while the regulations do not, in principle, require the fitting of safety belts in the hold of a police van, the practice is unsatisfactory as passengers transported in the hold may sustain injuries in accidents and during abrupt breaking or steering, as they are not protected by seatbelts. Furthermore, passengers are often in an unfit state to control their movements. Follow-up: The National Police Board reported that, during the next round of competitive tendering on the acquisition of new police patrol vans, which will be held in 2018, the specifications for the hold would include the option of fitting safety belts. Prison Rules at the Eastern Uusimaa Police Department police prison Among other issues, the Deputy-Ombudsman found that when the prison rules had been drawn up, inadequate consideration had been given to what types of orders may be given in prison rules. As a result, some of the rules are in violation of the law. Furthermore, insufficient attention has been paid to the fact that the Prison Rules form a self-standing regulation, not a collection of regulations. The issue of what types of matters may be regulated by prison rules, and what types of orders may be given on such matters, is not necessarily self-evident. The Deputy-Ombudsman therefore finds it crucial and necessary that the formulation of prison rules be placed under national guidance, rather than police departments attempting to resolve these regulatory problems on their own. Follow-up: The matter was discussed during a visit to the National Police Board. The National Police Board will issue instructions on the content of prison rules as soon as the amendments to the Act on the Treatment of Persons in the Custody of the Police has been approved. The treatment of a prisoner who had stayed in the isolation unit for more than two years The Deputy-Ombudsman found no sufficient or lawful reasons to segregate a person, who at his own request had lived for nearly two years and three months in the isolation unit, from other prisoners. More effective intervention should have been made in the situation, in which the prisoner was afraid of other prisoners. Unlike the ordinary prison rooms, the isolation unit and adjacent exercise yard were unsuitable for long-term accommodation and the decision to place the person in segregation had not been made through due process. An own-initiative investigation was launched based on an observation made during a prison visit. 95