CAT/C/52/2 the Subcommittee, are implicit in the Rules themselves: due process, human dignity and non-discrimination in places of detention. Due process 54. Since imprisonment can only be legitimate when sanctioned by legal process, the Subcommittee believes that it would be appropriate for the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners to acknowledge the importance of due process as a basic procedural safeguard which is applicable not only throughout all phases of the criminal justice process but also the period of imprisonment itself. Due process obligations are not limited to the criminal proceedings and trial. The State has the obligation to ensure that the rights of those convicted and those on remand are properly protected throughout their period of imprisonment. 55. As a result, there must be effective legal procedures available to all prisoners enabling them to challenge any acts or omissions on the part of the detention staff or authorities which are believed to exceed what has been legally sanctioned, and their incidental consequences. 56. In order to achieve such a standard of protective oversight, there needs to be a competent, independent and impartial authority or judicial body empowered to determine whether the detention staff or authorities have acted in breach of their mandate or in excess of their authority and before which both the detainee and custodial staff or authorities appear on an equal footing. 57. While in prison, whether sentenced or in pretrial custody, persons deprived of their liberty must be able to receive advice and assistance from individuals with adequate legal knowledge regarding the exercise of their rights, to enable them to access complaints mechanisms. They must also have effective access to a lawyer who is able to initiate appropriate forms of proceedings before the relevant competent authority or judicial body. 58. Proceedings arising from the situation in penitentiaries can be specialized and may require the expertise of different forms of legal skills than those appropriate for defending against a criminal charge. Translation facilities may also be required. When determining issues brought before them, the competent authority or judicial body must be able to take into account relevant national and international human rights standards. Human dignity 59. Deprivation of liberty does not negate the right to personal self-determination, which needs to be respected and protected to the maximum extent possible while in prison. In particular, all persons enjoy, inter alia, freedom of conscience, which remains inviolable, and the right to a life plan, which is only temporarily interrupted by the fact that they are imprisoned.6 60. All prisoners are the subjects of rights and duties rather than being objects of treatment or correction. Hence, a paradigm shift away from clinical or therapeutic assumptions, where such assumptions exist, is necessary in order to properly reflect a human rights-oriented approach which works to prevent ill-treatment.7 6 7 The concept of the right to a life plan has been developed by the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. The Subcommittee notes that the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners currently appears to use the word “treatment” in at least three different ways: (a) in a general, rather ambiguous 13