means of face to face comparison of evidence and video recordings. Inquiries should also include information on the personality of the prisoner. From the moment that a disciplinary fault is formed, the inquiry report constitutes the step in the proceedings which refers the prisoner for appearance before a disciplinary committee with reformed competence. - The acts at the origin of the proceedings are examined by the disciplinary committee, at the end of an inter partes hearing. The officer or graded officer having conducted the inquiry is serves as reporting official to the disciplinary committee. The committee includes (as currently) an external assessor. It is chaired by one of the assistants of the head of the institution specially designated for this purpose. The prisoner appears assisted by a lawyer or a specially-appointed representative [if they have so requested]. - After having heard the reporting official followed by the representative and the prisoner, who speaks last, the committee deliberates and issues a decision, which sets out its reasons and is made public, read at the time of the hearing before the disciplinary committee, delivers a verdict with regard to guilt and puts forward a sanction. This decision is immediately handed over to the head of the institution who has to make a decision within twenty-four hours of receipt. They may follow the decision, reduce or increase the sanction – in which case they give the specific reasons for their decision – or demand a new examination of the proceedings. In the second place, in order to clearly dissociate disciplinary measures from measures for the tailoring of sentences to the needs of individual offenders, the system of remission credits should be given a purely administrative character and, therefore, the head of the institution should be invested with a power of withdrawal connected to the pronouncement of disciplinary sanctions, according to a pre-established scale and with remedies defined by law. On the other hand, the criteria on which the JAP relies within the framework of additional remission decisions should be broadened in order to take the prisoner’s behaviour into account, without being bound by disciplinary decisions in any way whatsoever; Finally, the Contrôleur général desires that reflection should be initiated by the Minister of Justice, in order to surround the particular prerogatives of heads of institutions with the necessary guarantees and introduce systematic control by the liberty and custody judge whenever punishment cell sanctions of more than five days are pronounced, in order to check the conditions of enforcement of disciplinary measures. 146