? Questions for monitors: The prison regime While it is for the national prison administration to determine the most suitable placement approach, detention monitors have a key role to play by shedding light on the human rights concerns that different placement options may pose. Questions that help monitoring bodies explore the issue may include the following: • Do the conditions of detention amount to ill-treatment or even torture? Consider the conditions in solitary confinement (including indefinite and prolonged solitary confinement), overcrowding, denial of contact with the outside world, etc. Consider also the daily out-of-cell time allowed, as well as the nature/quality and frequency of human contact, paying attention to the cumulative impact of security measures that, taken together, could represent human rights violations. • Is the use of solitary confinement monitored, documented and regularly reviewed by prison administrations and internal and external monitoring bodies, and in line with established international standards? Do those affected have an effective right to challenge decisions to impose or extend solitary confinement before an independent mechanism? • Does the use of solitary confinement appear discriminatory towards certain 351 individuals and groups? How is its use documented in individual prisoner files? • Do those in solitary confinement receive a daily visit from health-care personnel? Are such visits’ purpose clear, and fulfilled (i.e., the visits must not be used to “condon[e] 352 or legitimi[ze] a decision to put or to keep a prisoner in solitary confinement”)? • Is any decision around isolation, quarantine or confinement on the grounds of medical reasons (for instance in the context of COVID-19) made and reviewed regularly by healthcare staff, based on the most recent scientific advice? • Are measures in place to mitigate the impact of any isolation? • Are the conditions and modalities of security related practices necessary, proportionate and non-discriminatory, and based on an individual assessment 353 of risks (use of force and instruments of restraint, cell and body searches, surveillance, restrictions of detainees’ contacts with the outside world, lawyer and medical personnel)? Do they raise concern at a systemic level by way of their frequent or arbitrary imposition, or the cumulative impact of multiple measures? Is the legal framework for regulating the imposition of security measures adequate? • Is an effective complaints or appeal mechanism available? Are prisoners able to make complaints and requests confidentially, without risk of reprisals? 351 Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, op. cit., note 256, para. 93. 352 Sharon Shalev, A Sourcebook on Solitary Confinement, (London: Manheim Centre for Criminology, London School of Economics, 2008), pp. 60-61. 353 For further guidance on monitoring these (and other) issues see: Omega Research Foundation and the University of Exeter “Monitoring Weapons and Restraints in Places of Detention: A Practical Guide”, 2021; PRI and APT, “Detention Monitoring Tool: Addressing Risk Factors to Prevent Torture and Ill-treatment”, 2015. 73