require a court decision to perform a body search of a prisoner were closed and the application was dismissed on 26 November 2019 (case ref. no. K 5/16)144. It is worth to note that situations occurred in the past, when a decision to carry out a body search was not justified from the point of view of security, which has already been pointed out by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg in it judgments regarding Poland. ECHR: Every day body search of inmates, involving the need to strip down naked, did not result from any specific security reasons and were not related to suspicions resulting from inmate’s behaviour. Such a practice must have made the inmate concerned feel humiliated, depressed and must have caused suffering that exceeded the unavoidable amount of suffering and deprivation related to imprisonment145. Domestic legislation applied in practice does not ensure an effective measure for inmates to appeal against decisions to carry out body search. Due to the lack of such measure, it is difficult to enforce, across the country, the obligation to have a sufficient justification for body search or body inspection connected with taking off the clothes by the inmate146. Standards applicable to the numbers of forensic psychologists Since 2016, the NMPT has been emphasizing the need to increase the number of psychologists employed in penitentiary establishments. In the opinion of the National Mechanism, psychological care in prisons is not sufficient, and the existing standard (one psychologist per 200 inmates) does not ensure the effectiveness of psychological support147. Working with so many inmates, a psychologist is unable to perform his/her work effectively. This issue was raised by the Commissioner for Human Rights again in his letter to the Director General of the Prison Service, as described in the chapter "General intervention letters". 144 See: Report of the Commissioner for Human Rights on the activities of the National Mechanism for the Prevention of Torture in Poland in 2019. 145 Judgment in the case: Świderski versus Poland, of 16 February 2016, complaint no. 5532/10, points 60-61. 146 Judgment in the case: Milka versus Poland, of 15 September 2015, complaint no. 14322/12, points 30 and 48. 147 Order No. 19/16 of the Director General of the Prison Service of 14 April 2016 on the detailed rules of conduct and organization of penitentiary work and on the scopes of activities of officers and employees of penitentiary and therapeutic units and penitentiary wards, point 3(2). 64