A/HRC/28/68 77. An important safeguard against torture and other forms of ill-treatment is the support given to children in detention to maintain contact with parents and family through telephone, electronic or other correspondence, and regular visits at all times. Children should be placed in a facility that is as close as possible to the place of residence of their family. Any exceptions to this requirement should be clearly described in the law and not be left to the discretion of the competent authorities. Moreover, children should be given permission to leave detention facilities for a visit to their home and family, and for educational, vocational or other important reasons. The child’s contact with the outside world is an integral part of the human right to humane treatment, and should never be denied as a disciplinary measure. 78. Children in detention should be provided throughout the day with a full programme of education, sport, vocational training, recreation and other purposeful out-of-cell activities. This includes physical exercise for at least two hours every day in the open air, and preferably for a considerably longer time. Girls should under no circumstances receive less care, protection, assistance and training, including equal access to sport and recreation. 79. The Special Rapporteur recalls that detention and forced labour programmes for children who use drugs are not a legitimate substitute for evidence-based measures, such as substitution therapy, psychological intervention and other forms of treatment given with full, informed consent (A/65/255, para. 31). Drug dependence as a “multi-factoral health disorder” requires a health response rather than recourse to detention. 80. Within the context of administrative immigration enforcement, it is now clear that the deprivation of liberty of children based on their or their parents’ migration status is never in the best interests of the child, exceeds the requirement of necessity, becomes grossly disproportionate and may constitute cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of migrant children. Following the advisory opinion of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the rights and guarantees of children in the context of migration and/or in need of international protection in 2014, the Special Rapporteur recalls the different procedural purposes between immigration and criminal proceedings, and that, in the words of the Court, “the offenses concerning the entry or stay in one country may not, under any circumstances, have the same or similar consequences to those derived from the commission of a crime.” The Special Rapporteur therefore concludes that the principle of ultima ratio that applies to juvenile criminal justice is not applicable to immigration proceedings. The deprivation of liberty of children based exclusively on immigration-related reasons exceeds the requirement of necessity because the measure is not absolutely essential to ensure the appearance of children at immigration proceedings or to implement a deportation order. Deprivation of liberty in this context can never be construed as a measure that complies with the child`s best interests. Immigration detention practices across the globe, whether de jure or de facto, put children at risk of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Furthermore, the detention of children who migrate to escape exploitation and abuse contravenes the duty of the State to promote the physical and psychological recovery of child victims in an appropriate environment. 24 Therefore, States should, expeditiously and completely, cease the detention of children, with or without their parents, on the basis of their immigration status. States should make clear in their legislation, policies and practices that the principle of the best interests of the child takes priority over migration policy and 24 Convention on the Rights of the Child, arts. 34 and 39. 17