Law provides the right “at any time and without a special permit to visit closed-type institutions, to move freely within the territory of the institutions, to visit all premises and to meet in private the persons held in closed-type institutions”. However, the Committee is concerned at the lack of systematic and effective monitoring of all places of detention and reiterates its concern noted in paragraph 6 on the insufficient resources allocated to the Ombudsman institution. The Committee is also concerned at the lack of a comprehensive listing of all places of detention, including those of aliens (arts. 2, 11 and 16). The State party should take the necessary measures to effectively and systematically monitor all places of detention. The Committee recommends that the State party develop a comprehensive listing of all places of detention, including places of detention of aliens, and establish a central register of inmates or, alternatively, finalize the development of a common database to be used by the Imprisonment Facility Management Board and the State Probation Service which will allow tracking down every detainee and/or convicted prisoner within the penitentiary system, as well as within the probation system. Conditions in psychiatric institutions and hospitals (15) The Committee notes the recent amendments to the Medical Treatment Law, introducing the procedure of judicial review of compulsory involuntary placement of patients in the psychiatric hospitals and their subsequent treatment, and the establishment of a new modern ambulatory mental assistance centre in Riga. However, the Committee remains concerned at conditions in psychiatric institutions and hospitals, including the use of physical restraints and isolation (arts. 11 and 16). The State party should review the use of physical restraints, consider establishing guidelines on the use of such restraints and limit the use of solitary confinement as a measure of last resort, for as short a time as possible under strict supervision and with a possibility of judicial review. The State party is encouraged to promptly adopt the draft Programme on Improvement of the Mental Health of the Population for 2008-2013. Use of force and ill-treatment (16) The Committee expresses its concern at the high number of allegations of use of force and ill-treatment by law enforcement officials, especially in the course of or in relation to apprehension, and the low number of convictions in such cases. The Committee is also concerned that officials accused of torture and ill-treatment seems to be given disciplinary sanctions or warnings and it regrets the lack of a separate account of such disciplinary sanctions (arts. 12 and 16). The State party should take effective measures to send a clear and unambiguous message to all levels of the police force hierarchy that torture, use of force and ill-treatment are unacceptable, including through the enforcement of the 2003 Professional Ethics and Conduct Code of the State Police Personnel, and ensure that law enforcement officials only use force when strictly necessary and to the extent required for the performance of their duty. Referring to article 4, paragraph 2 of the Convention, the Committee underlines that the State party should apply sanctions that are proportional with the offences, and the State party is encouraged to initiate the collection of statistics on disciplinary penalties imposed. Prompt and impartial investigations (17) The Committee, while noting that several complaints bodies are mandated to review individual complaints about police misconduct, is concerned at the number of complaints of physical use of force and ill-treatment by law enforcement officials, the limited number of investigations carried out by the State party in such cases, and the very limited number of convictions in those cases which are investigated. The Committee also notes with concern that the offence of torture, which as such does not exist in the Latvian Criminal Code but rather is punishable under other provisions of the Criminal Code, might in some cases be subject to a statute of limitations. The Committee is of the view that acts of torture cannot be subject to any statute of limitations (arts. 1, 4, 12 and 16). 23