113. Access to independent legal advice and the opportunity to challenge detention are essential safeguards for the protection of detainees from ill-treatment. Despite this, some domestic legislation does not provide for a habeas corpus procedure. This lack of ability to challenge the lawfulness of detention is a violation of due process, and makes suspects, accused persons or defendants particularly vulnerable to human rights abuses. This is extremely concerning, given that initial hearings in which the lawfulness of detention are reviewed may be the first opportunity that suspects have to allege torture,251 and judges at these hearings can – and should – play a crucial and proactive role in determining whether suspects or charged individuals have been subjected to torture or other ill-treatment. 114. Detainees in pre-trial detention are especially vulnerable to coercion, ill-treatment or even torture for the purpose of obtaining evidence, confessions or trial waivers. In the majority of countries surveyed, there are indications that pre-trial detention is used in some form to persuade suspects or accused persons to plead guilty or confess, which renders the detention unlawful. There are reports from OSCE participating States where not confessing was considered an informal ground or consideration for requesting or ordering pre-trial detention, or that pre-trial detainees were held in police custody rather than pre-trial detention centres in order to facilitate coercion into confessing.252 Conditions and practices common to pre-trial detention that are conducive to torture or other ill-treatment 115. Even in cases where the use of pre-trial detention is lawful, used as a measure of last resort and based on an individualized decision, there are factors conducive to torture and other ill-treatment that can be observed across the OSCE region. The very fact that detainees are held in custody makes them more vulnerable to torture and other ill-treatment, including from police, prison guards and fellow detainees.253 Limited contact with the outside world, combined with limited access for independent experts, CSOs and lawyers to places of detention, leave detainees in extremely vulnerable positions.254 This lack of contact with the outside world can make torture and other ill-treatment in places of detention easier to conceal. 251 Fair Trials and REDRESS, op. cit., note 26, pp. 51–52. 252 Questionnaire responses from Hungarian Helsinki Committee and Nota Bene (Tajikistan) (2019); see also Open Society Justice Initiative, ‘Pretrial Detention and Torture: Why Pretrial Detainees Face the Greatest Risk’, (2011) p.41 referring to Moldova and Kazakhstan. 253 Fair Trials, op. cit., note 4; Open Society Justice Initiative, “Pre-trial Detention and Torture: Why Pre-trial Detainees Face the Greatest Risk”, (2011). 254 Fair Trials, op. cit., note 4. 71