85. In Moscow and Saint Petersburg, most of the detained persons made no complaints about the manner in which they were treated by law enforcement ofcials; however, some allegations of recent physical ill-treatment were received. The delegation also received several accounts of recent physical ill-treatment in the Republic of Udmurtia, mainly referring to the time of initial interviews by operational ofcers. Numerous allegations of recent physical ill-treatment of persons, including juveniles, held by law enforcement ofcials were heard in the Republics of Bashkortostan and Tatarstan, as well as in Vladimir Region. In a number of instances, the alleged ill-treatment was of such severity as to amount to torture: infiction of electric shocks; asphyxiation with a gas mask or a plastic bag; extensive beating whilst handcufed to a fxed object and/or blindfolded; forcing a person to bend forward in a chair in a foetal position, handcufed behind his back, and placing a heavy object on his back – a method referred to as “televizor”; infiction of burns to the genitals. In its report on the previous periodic visit in 2008, the CPT indicated that, if police ill-treatment remained unchallenged, it could easily become an almost accepted feature of police operating practice. A little less than four years later, notwithstanding the eforts to reform Internal Afairs structures, the frequency and consistency of the allegations suggested that methods of severe ill-treatment/torture continue to be used on a frequent basis by police and other law enforcement ofcials, in particular outside Moscow city and Saint Petersburg. 86. The CPT calls upon the Russian authorities to strengthen action to prevent ill-treatment by the police and members of other agencies (including the Federal Drug Control Service and the General Report of the CPT, 2013-2014 ► Page 42 Federal Security Service) and reiterates the importance of efective action by the investigating authorities when information indicative of possible ill-treatment comes to light. Concerning the formal safeguards against ill-treatment (in particular, notifcation of custody, access to a lawyer and access to a doctor), they still only became available from the moment of the frst ofcial interview by the investigator, i.e. several hours (and sometimes much longer) after the de facto apprehension and initial questioning by operational ofcers. The CPT was also concerned by the fact that holding cells in police divisions were still frequently used for overnight stays (on occasion, for up to 48 hours). As observed on all the previous visits to the Russian Federation, none of these holding cells was suitable for holding persons for longer than a few hours. By contrast, most of the temporary detention centres (IVS) visited ofered decent conditions of detention. 87. Turning to prisons, the CPT’s delegation received no allegations of illtreatment of prisoners by staf at Federalpurpose pre-trial establishment (SIZO) No. 3 in Saint Petersburg and SIZO No. 1 in Kazan. In addition, no credible allegations of ill-treatment were heard at SIZO No. 4 in Moscow or at SIZO No. 1 (“Kresty”) in Saint Petersburg. As regards SIZO No. 1 in Ufa, most of the inmates interviewed made no complaints about the attitude of staf towards them. In contrast, at Closed-Type Prison No. 2 (“Vladimirskiy Tsentral”) in Vladimir, several consistent allegations of physical ill-treatment of inmates by staf were received. As for Strict-Regime Colony No. 1 in Yagul, many inmates interviewed stressed that there had been a clear improvement as regards the attitude of staf towards them since the CPT’s previous visit to