and “implementation of article 24 of the Act of 12 th April 2000”, though the former is included in the latter. Disciplinary proceedings are the procedures that have been described so far in this section and are strictly limited to providing a response to acts which correspond to the notion of “fault”; for its part, implementation of article 24 of the act of 12 th April 2000 applies to a much larger field, necessarily distinct from the notion of “fault”, and leads to measures such as the suspension or withdrawal of visiting permits, denial and withholding of correspondence, withholding of publications, withdrawal of previously granted authorisations, suspension of or dismissal from employment, exclusion from sports activities for reasons of security etc. Amongst these measures, only dismissal from employment and suspensions of visiting permits may be enforced in a temporary manner, that is to say pending the inter partes hearing imposed by article 24. The inspectors ascertained that there is sometimes confusion with regard to the distinction between the implementation of disciplinary proceedings – particularly controlled under the law in its current state – and the use of article 24 – less formal and therefore potentially less protective of fundamental rights. Numerous domains come within the scope of the implementation of article 24 of the Act of 12th April 2000 and therefore stand to be affected by any confusion that may arise between the latter and disciplinary proceedings: dismissal of prisoners from employment and training, placements in solitary confinement, suspension of visiting permits, withholding of possessions etc. 2.2.7.1 Dismissal from Employment and Training There are three forms of dismissal of prisoners: Disciplinary dismissals, which can only be pronounced in order to punish faults relating to employment, are subject to traditional disciplinary proceedings: appearance before a disciplinary committee, possibility of gaining access to the file and enlisting the assistance of a lawyer etc. Dismissals pronounced as non-disciplinary measures – that is to say in cases where persons granted employment show difficulties in adapting to their work or prove to be incompetent at performing the required tasks – for their part, have to comply with the inter partes proceedings provided for by article 24 of the Act of 12 th April 2000: prior notification of the prisoner of the decision liable to be taken against them, possibility of presenting written and oral remarks, possibility of enlisting the assistance of a lawyer and of consulting their file etc. Finally, dismissals pronounced as temporary administrative measures do not fall within the field of application of article 24 of the Act of 12 th April 2000. The persons concerned simply have to be notified of them, as is the case for all individual administrative decisions. However, numerous prisoners have called the Contrôleur général’s attention to dismissals affecting them which were not enforced in accordance with the respective principles pertaini ng to each of the procedures. Thus some were subject to disciplinary dismissal for acts that can unquestionably be considered disciplinary faults unrelated to their professional activity. By way of illustration, the Contrôleur général was apprised in particular of the case of two prisoners within the same institution, who had been granted employment as floor assistant helpers. Following a search of the sector, they were enjoined to clear their cell and place some of their personal possessions in the property office. In spite of repeated requests to the warders, they were not able to obtain 132