2. Foreign nationals restricted in freedom Challenge for 2018 We have repeatedly encountered resentment on the part of Police officers escorting foreign nationals toward our participation in escort vehicles together with the foreigners being expelled. The presence on premises and in vehicles where a foreign national being expelled and restricted in freedom is present is necessary for obtaining direct findings on treatment during the entire process of forced return. If the Police refuse to provide this type of collaboration, they prevent full attainment of the purpose of monitoring as well as exercise of the authorisation granted to the Public Defender of Rights by national law and by the Return Directive. The Czech Republic has to fulfil its duties following from the Directive and introduce an effective system for monitoring forced returns. We discussed the issue with representatives of the Foreigner Police in 2017, but to no avail. Routine use of coercive measures We point out in the long term that it is not appropriate to routinely handcuff foreign nationals who are being escorted. It has been repeatedly found that the police officers decide on the use of handcuffs without taking proper account of the specific aspects of each case. Under the Police Act, the escort leader may decide on the use of handcuffs if there is a substantiated concern regarding security or if there is a danger that the person being escorted may try to escape. The concern may be justified by the behaviour of the person being escorted or by some other imminent risk. At the same time, the Act requires the Police to proceed so that any potential interference with the rights and freedoms of the persons against whom the given measure is aimed does not exceed the degree necessary to attain the purpose of the act. Handcuffs may be used only if this is really necessary to ensure smooth course of the escort, for the necessary period of time and if there is no other, less restrictive measure. Are there no indications that smooth course of the escort is endangered? Then there is no reason to interfere with the rights of the persons being escorted by handcuffing them. In a majority of cases, there is no indication that the safety of persons, property or public order might be endangered, and nothing warrants the assumption that the person being escorted will try to escape. The Defender resolved to impose a sanction in 2017. Following futile efforts to make the Directorate of the Foreigner Police to provide for a remedy in specific cases, she informed directly the Police President of the shortcomings.  The letter on imposing penalty Example of unjustified and thus illegitimate handcuffing A foreign national spent a total of 16 years in the Czech Republic. However, he did not have a proper residence permit and had been repeatedly ordered to leave the territory of the Czech Republic. Since he did not obey, he is now awaiting forced return to his country of origin in a facility for detention of foreigners. He has accepted that he will have to leave. He speaks fluent Czech, communicates lively with the facility staff and has a good relationship with the social workers. Some of them have come personally to bid him farewell. He has never been aggressive or showed any active resistance in the past. The police officers escorting him would now handcuff him without any satisfactory explanation: they would inform the foreigner that the objective is to limit his movement and later explain to the monitors that based on a binding internal instruction, the Police are authorised to use the handcuffs and have thus taken advantage of this authorisation. There is no indication whatsoever during the entire process that the foreigner would mount resistance or would try to frustrate the expulsion in any way. The police officers have utilised a means that is available to them under the law, regardless of the circumstances of the case. They failed to proceed in conformity with the principles of necessity and proportionality. 16