86 11. Groups of persons deprived of their liberty at the places of detention using technical means as well. The on-site inspection ordered by the court established that the proper conditions for the use of the tracking device could be ensured in the apartment designated as the site of the house arrest. The detainee lived alone in an upstairs, terraced, two-room apartment with a well-equipped kitchen, separate bathroom, and restroom. Public utilities, including electricity and water, internet connection and cable television service were all accessible in the apartment. Under the court’s decision, the detainee was not allowed to leave the apartment. According to the records on putting on the tracking device, the detainee was duly briefed on the system’s operation, its proper use, and on the handling of his personal and special data. During the visit, the detainee confirmed that he had received this information and he had been shown how to use the device. The device had to be charged from time to time, but it could be conveniently done in the bedroom, even while sleeping. The waterproof device could resist the impacts of everyday life, it did not have to be taken off even while showering. Tracking device on the body of the person under house arrest The internal unit, connected to the mains outlet in the apartment, could monitor the detainee’s movement within 25 meters, with the help of the device attached to his ankle. He could go out to the terrace, but, when leaving the apartment, he had to turn back from the elevator door. When out of range, the device started to vibrate and whistle. The ankle device also enabled satellite monitoring, i.e., with the court’s permission, he could have left the apartment under technical surveillance. The detainee’s assets were sequestered, his bank card withdrawn. According to him, he was living on the money that her mother had given him from her pension. His family members assisted him in getting provisions: once a week they went shopping for him using the shopping list prepared by him. He prepared his meals himself. Earlier, while he was in pre-trial detention, he spent a week in hospital when he underwent surgery. After the operation, he had to take medications; however, he could not leave the site of the house arrest even for a medical examination. Pursuant to Section 11 of Act LXXXIII of 1997 on the benefits of compulsory health insurance, the insured person is entitled to medical exam ination and treatment at home only if warranted by his/her state of health. Although the detainee’s state of health would have allowed him to go to the