11.1. Children deprived of their liberty The reception of children into the institution was followed by a socalled isolation period during which–for a period spanning from one week to one month–they could not leave the premises of the institution. In my report, I pointed out that the isolation period, in addition to resulting in deprivation of freedom, also hindered children from maintaining contact with family members. Children to be transferred were often informed of their transfer on the day of departure, which violates the principles of child-friendly justice: and jeopardizes the enforcement of the right of proper administration and the right to remedy. In my report, I asked the head of the Zita Children’s Home to take the necessary steps in order to make the staff or the legal representative inform the children in due time on the Guardianship Office’s transfer decision. The isolation room designated for segregating children demonstrating “immediately dangerous behavior ” was unsafe at the time of the visit. According to the staff, the isolation room had not been in use. Leaving without permission was sanctioned by deprivation of days out; its duration could be anywhere between one day and one week. Deprivation of days out did not mean being locked in, but they could not leave the premises unaccompanied. There had been occasions when, due to the small number of the staff, they could not provide adults who could accompany the children, so they could not go out. Isolation period, isolation room and deprivation of days out notwithstanding, the provisions on restricting personal liberty in the professional program of the Zita Children’s Home were limited to repeating the text of the relevant legal regulation and did not contain any further detailed rules or guarantees. I also pointed out that, considering the regulations (on ordering and terminating isolation, monitoring, notifying, and exercising the right to complain) prevailing in other types of institutions (healthcare, social care or penitentiary institutions), the inadequate rules of safety isolation as a form of deprivation of liberty do not provide adequate guarantees. In my report, I requested the head of the Zita Children’s Home to revise the institutional practices of depriving children of their liberty. All cases of deprivation of liberty shorter than 48 hours should be properly documented, any case of “isolation” or deprivation of liberty exceeding 48 hours should be reported to the competent Guardianship Office. I also requested the head of the institution to ensure that the staff members had appropriate knowledge of the legal background and the practical application of deprivation of liberty. Home for Children with Special Needs of the Károlyi István Children’s Center At the time of the visit, there were 32 children residing and 28 staff members working in the children’s home. At the time of the visit, the system of double registration (locally and, e.g., also in the penitentiary institutions) of minors 73