CAT/OP/ITA/1 prison. The SPT regards this militarised approach, including weapons worn in a visible manner and the presence of dogs, as unnecessary and highly intimidating, especially considering that many migrants have suffered traumatising experiences in their countries of origin or during their journeys. The SPT welcomes information received during its followup visit that an agreement between the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Interior has been recently signed. This agreement aimed at treating the deportation procedures of persons while they were still in custody and it would allow for a more relaxed security policy in CIEs. 81. The SPT observed during the visit that facilities themselves added to the hostile environment as the compounds were divided into multiple enclosed sections and surrounded by various fences with barbed wire. The SPT considers this security structure to be completely unnecessary for the purposes of administrative detention. As an example, in some CIEs visited food and drinks vending machines were freely accessible during certain hours, but in others only upon request with a military escort. The SPT also emphasises that with the material, organisational, infrastructure and security structure of these facilities, they would be entirely inappropriate to be reconfigured and established as ‘hotspots’, failing to meet international human rights laws and standards required to prevent arbitrary detention, inhuman and degrading treatment. In this respect, the SPT welcomes information received during its follow-up visit that so far CIEs have not been used as ‘hotspots’. 82. The SPT recommends that the State party: (a) continue the scaling down process of its CIE facilities and shifts to a system of alternatives to detention, resorting to immigration detention only when expulsion is imminent and detention necessary and proportionate; (b) ensure that all immigration detention facilities are demilitarised by removing intimidating security and surveillance infrastructure and reducing the level and number of armed military and law enforcement presence on the premises; (c) ensure that all immigration detention facilities are reorganised to reflect the purpose of administrative detention, whereby interferences with individual autonomy are kept to a minimum, and any restrictions are strictly necessary to maintain security and order. 83. The SPT reiterates that any detention represents a serious infringement of a person’s right to liberty and has a deteriorating effect on a human being, impacting their right to a highest attainable standard of health and other related human rights. Immigration detention of children is never in the best interest of a child and always constitutes a violation of the rights of the child. The SPT noted positively, that children or families with children are not detained in CIEs, although an allegation was received in one CIE that a child was being detained subsequent to the discovery of its actual age. 84. The SPT recommends that Italy ensures that children are promptly identified and anyone claiming to be a child be treated as such until the contrary has been proven. Age determination processes should be a measure of last resort and be conducted by child protection officers in a prompt, child-friendly, gender sensitive manner. Where these processes are inconclusive, the benefit of the doubt should be afforded to the person being assessed. 85. The SPT noted that the language adopted to refer to the detention of persons in CIEs is likened to internment, reflecting the administrative nature of these centres. In reality, however, the structure and functioning of these facilities all but resembled an administrative detention setting. 86. The SPT found that migrants detained in CIEs fell broadly into three categories: a) individuals who had been convicted of a criminal offence, who had served a custodial 15