CAT/OP/ITA/1 disembarkation, no questions are asked to assess whether a migrant is at particular risk or seeking protection. The SPT emphasises that each person must be afforded an individualised examination of all arguments militating against his or her expulsion in order to avoid collective expulsions, violations of the principle of non-refoulement and the prohibition of discrimination. 92. The SPT recommends that Italy ensures that direct transfers from disembarkation to CIEs are avoided and the presumption against detention is upheld. It should further ensure that individual assessments are carried out for all migrants arriving by sea without discrimination of any kind. 93. The physical conditions in the CIEs varied but they were generally substandard, sometimes considerably so. The SPT observed filthy mattresses; some had no sheets and a number of detainees suffered from sores and scabies. The toilets and showers were generally in poor condition as well: in a state of disrepair, dirty, or lacking warm water. Within the CIEs the cells were of varying standards, with one or two fitted with a television or an air conditioner and more spacious, while the majority of cells were small and did not feature any of these furnishings. 94. The SPT recommends that Italy guarantee that each CIE is able to swiftly ensure its shower and toilet facilities are repaired and regularly maintained and that mattresses and bedding meet adequate hygiene standards. 95. The SPT regards the food provided in the CIEs to be of poor standards. In addition, the SPT notes the stark contrast in provision of food between CIEs and the CARA inspected in Bari. The SPT fails to recognise any reasonable justification for the difference in standards. 96. The SPT recommends that Italy ensure that meals provided are of adequate quantity and quality in all CIEs and migrants are provided comparable standards in water and food regardless of their status and place of detention or reception. 97. Migrants could have access during certain hours to their personal belongings that were centrally stored. They could only keep their phones on them if they destroyed the camera on it for security reasons. Many items, such as books, pictures, posters and pens, were prohibited as a safety policy, without an individual risk assessment being carried out. However, the SPT noted that this rule was not applicable in all CIEs, raising questions as to its necessity in others. 98. Recreational spaces and activities were limited in all CIEs. All had outdoor and indoor spaces and a number of structured activities were offered, such as arts and crafts classes. However, migrants were rarely aware of the availability of any organised activities. Where they did participate, migrants voiced their frustration at not being allowed to keep the artwork. The exercise yards lacked equipment and could not serve their purpose and green areas were sparse if at all existent. Overall, the SPT found that the recreational spaces lacked the facilities for conducting any meaningful recreational, cultural or physical activities. 99. The SPT found that the negative impacts of detention on the well-being of migrants were exacerbated by the limitations placed on their autonomy and inability to engage in any recreational, cultural or physical activities. The SPT was made aware of a regulation containing common standards to be applied across all the CIEs. However, this was not being implemented in practice, resulting in differential treatment without individual risk assessments or other reasonable and objective justifications. 100. The areas for visitors in the CIEs provided limited privacy. In the CIE holding both men and women, couples were held separately and the only meeting space was the visitors’ room, during scheduled hours. 17