Here is the inquiry report as handed over to the director of the (long-term) detention centre concerned: “Dear Madam the Director, In order to gain a better understanding of access to IT for prisoners within your institution, I delegated two heads of inquiry to conduct on-site verifications on the basis of the evidence and to have talks with the assistant director, the local IT systems correspondent and prisoners who own computer hardware. On 18th and 19th April last they went to your institution and were able to gain access to the documents requested without any difficulties and converse in a confidential manner with all of the people that they wanted to interview. From the various difficulties raised concerning access to IT facilities, it was possible to ascertain the following: Rules of access to IT facilities in the detention centre The rules and regulations of the detention centre, which were validated on 11 th May 2009 by the interregional department of prison services, specify the terms of access to IT facilities in detention, under section 3 concerning relations. Technical data sheet no. 3, which is annexed to the rules and regulations, specifies the legal framework and deals with the processing of applications for the purchase of IT equipment, hardware (principal authorised and prohibited technologies), exchange of IT media, computer passwords, the placing of seals on cases, physical and virtual searches on computers and data media, and release as well as IT publications. The text refers to the circular of 10th August 2006. The Contrôleur général des lieux de privation de liberté (CGLPL) recommends that the part of the rules and regulations dealing with the use of IT facilities in the detention centre should be brought into line with current circulars. In addition to this text, the circular issued by the prisons administration department (DAP) on 13th October 2009 concerning access to IT facilities for persons in custody may be consulted in prisons, in the offices of senior prison officers and accommodation officers. Since the general search conducted upon IT facilities organised by the Interregional Department of Prison Services of … in January 2012, a copy of the public version of the aforementioned circular, with acknowledgement of receipt, is handed over to every prisoner who requests the acquisition of a computer or the use of an IT tool in their cell. The local information systems correspondent (CLSI) has occupied his position since 2003. He henceforth works alone, his former colleague having given up their duties within the institution several weeks before the on-site inquiry took place. In addition to managing prisoners’ computer hardware, he is also in charge of the institution’s IT facilities: the computers of prison administration staff and of the activity rooms (library, school centre, IT room and workshops). The CLSI mentioned that he does not have any qualification in the IT field. He moreover specified to the inquirers that prisoners often have greater knowledge of IT than he does himself. The CGLPL recommends the recruitment of persons with IT qualifications for CLSI positions. Failing this, the personnel appointed should be able to have the benefit of training leading to the award of qualifications in the field. At the time of the inquiry, there were sixty-four192 computers in the detention centre: two of them belonged to persons soon to be released, and were offset by applications for the acquisition of computer hardware from two other prisoners. By way of comparison, at 20 th September 2011, fifty-five prisoners possessed computers in the detention centre. The inquirers were informed that there were seventy-eight games consoles in the detention centre at the time of the inspection. However, it emerges from the – undated – list of games consoles brought to the attention of the inquirers that fifty-six prisoners possess one or several games consoles, that is to say sixty two games consoles divided as follows: - One of which the nature is not specified; 192 At the time of the visit, the total population of the institution amounted to 293 prisoners. The proportion of persons possessing computers in detention was then 22% of inmates. 91