2.2.3 – Strip-searches Staff members should indicate their presence in a suitable manner before looking through a peephole, especially if the toilet in a custody cell is not partitioned off. The person inside must be given the opportunity to indicate that they are using the toilet. A CCTV camera must be installed in a way that the toilet area is either not visible on the monitor at all, or only as pixelated images. Unrestricted monitoring of the custody cell should only be permitted in carefully assessed, substantiated and clearly documented individual cases where there is an acute danger of selfharm or suicide. If a toilet area is indeed covered by CCTV monitoring and is not pixelated, only persons of the same sex as the detainee may carry out the monitoring. When police custody facilities are in use, stripsearches are regularly conducted involving a visual inspection of the detainee's genital area. This constitutes a serious interference with detainees’ 27 general rights of personality. It should therefore be decided on a case-by-case basis whether there are indications of a danger to public security and order that would justify a strip-search. Any such measures 28 must adhere to the principle of proportionality. If a strip-search is carried out, the reasons for this should be documented in a clear and comprehensible manner. Furthermore, the search should be conducted as respectfully as possible, for example involving two stages where half the body remains dressed in each stage. 2.2.6 – CCTV monitoring 2.2.4 – Size of custody cells CCTV monitoring should only be used in police stations in individual cases where it is imperative for the protection of the person concerned. The reasons for CCTV monitoring must be documented. In addition, the person concerned must be informed of the monitoring. The mere fact that the camera is visible is not sufficient. It must be possible for the person concerned to discern whether the camera is running. Custody cells in police stations must be of an adequate size. The National Agency deems a floor space of at least seven square metres per person generally necessary to ensure humane detention 29 conditions in police custody. However, in the course of its visits, the National Agency saw the need to establish minimum standards that should be adhered to at all times. This was observed in particular with regard to short-term detention. A single-occupancy custody cell must have a floor space of at least 4.5 square metres. Multipleoccupancy custody cells must have a floor space of at least 3.5 square metres per person. Facing walls must be separated by a distance of at least two metres, and the ceiling must be considerably higher than two 30 metres. 2.2.7 – Furnishings and fittings, conditions in custody cells The conditions in police custody cells, including furnishings and fittings, must be respectful of the human dignity of detainees. In Bremen City Centre Police Station, for instance, there were visible Nazi symbols that had been etched into the doors of the custody cells. Any comments or drawings with anticonstitutional content must be removed immediately. Every custody cell should be equipped with a smoke detector, an emergency button, adjustable lighting, a non-flammable, washable mattress, a blanket and a pillow. Where a custody cell is only equipped with a low bed, it must have additional seating at standard height. To ensure the protection of persons placed in custody in case of a fire, it is necessary that all custody cells are equipped with a smoke detector. In police stations, these are often located only in the corridor of the custody facility. In addition, it must be possible for persons deprived of their liberty to call for attention through an emergency button. In emergency situations, it is particularly important that assistance can be called for immediately. It must be guaranteed that the alarm system is working. This must be checked before each use of a custody cell. A positive example was seen in 2.2.5 – Visibility of toilets Custody cells were visited in Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, Brandenburg, Hamburg, North RhineWestphalia, Saxony-Anhalt and Saxony where the toilets were visible either through a peephole or via CCTV monitoring. The right to privacy must be upheld in custody facilities. Observation of persons whilst they are using the toilet constitutes a serious interference with their rights of personality. 27 Federal Constitutional Court, decision of 4 February 2009, file no. 2 BvR 455/08; Federal Constitutional Court, decision of 5 March 2015, file no. 2 BvR 746/13. 28 Cologne Administrative Court, 25/11/2015, file no. 20 K 2624/14. 29 See also: CPT/Inf (92) 3, p. 13, no. 43. 30 Ibid. 31