In the summary of his visit, the Chancellor noted that children staying in a closed institution who are separated from their family must have the possibility to communicate with their parents and next of kin. The Chancellor also cannot accept the current arrangement for making phone calls as this violates the right of children to the inviolability of private life and confidentiality of messages. The Chancellor proposed to the director of Tapa Special School to organise the communication of children with their parents and close ones in a way that does not violate the rights of children to the confidentiality of messages and inviolability of private life. In addition, the Chancellor recommended to the director of the special school, in cooperation with the Ministry of Education and Research, to find the necessary resources to ensure that also those children whose parents cannot pay for the phone calls could regularly communicate with their parents and close ones. 6. Providers of involuntary emergency psychiatric are PART II PART III Under the Juvenile Sanctions Act, the director of a school for pupils in need of special treatment due to behavioural problems or other staff of such a school do not have the right to examine the contents of a pupil’s correspondence and messages forwarded by telephone or other public communication channels. PART IV Under the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Child Protection Act, a child whose liberty is restricted and who is thus temporarily separated from his or her parents has the right to maintain personal relations and contact with both parents and close relatives, except if this is contrary to the child’s interests. The CPT also attaches considerable importance to the maintenance of good contacts with the outside world for all juveniles staying in closed institutions. The active promotion of such contacts can be especially beneficial for juveniles deprived of their liberty, many of whom may have behavioural problems related to emotional deprivation or a lack of social skills. The CPT also wishes to stress that a juvenile’s contact with the outside world should never be restricted or denied as a disciplinary measure.49 PART I CHANCELLOR OF JUSTICE AS NATIONAL PREVENTIVE MECHANISM During the reporting year, the Chancellor inspected six institutions providing involuntary emergency psychiatric care: −− Tartu University Clinic Foundation (case No 7-9/130434); −− South Estonian Hospital Ltd (case No 7-9/130245); −− Ahtme Hospital Foundation (case No 7-9/130612); −− Narva Hospital Foundation (case No 7-9/130436); −− Kuressaare Hospital Foundation (case No 7-9/130700); −− Pärnu Hospital Foundation (case No 7-9/140146). From the six inspection visits to providers of involuntary psychiatric care, one visit was announced.50 Experts were not involved in any of the visits as the Chancellor inspected the institutions with regard to the aspects where no specialist knowledge was needed for the assessment. First of all, the Chancellor noticed as a problem that not in all the psychiatric hospitals a psychiatrist was sufficiently involved in making decisions concerning involuntary treatment and applying means of restraint. As a recurring problem, insufficient registration of the applied means of restraint 51 and insufficient guarantee of the privacy of the patients arose.52 49 50 51 See the CPT Standards, p 73, para 34. Available online: http://www.cpt.coe.int/en/documents/eng-standards-scr.pdf. Inspection visit to Pärnu Hospital Foundation (case No 7-9/140146). See the Chancellor’s 2012 Overview, pp 8-9. Available online: http://oiguskantsler.ee/sites/default/files/ annual_report_2012.pdf. 52 Excessive use of video surveillance, see the inspection visit to Pärnu Hospital Foundation (case No 7-9/140146). 29