CAT/OP/CRI/ROSP/1 74. The Subcommittee takes notes of the fact that solitary confinement as a punishment is prohibited in the national prison system regulations. Nevertheless, that provision is inconsistent with article 473 (e) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which states that a sentence enforcement judge may “approve periods of isolation exceeding 48 hours, in cells”. During its visit, the Subcommittee found that isolation in “punishment cells” is approved in practice by sentence enforcement judges for periods exceeding 48 hours and that such a measure has been imposed for periods of up to one month, without any medical supervision. The person in solitary confinement has access to a telephone and is allowed one hour of sun per day, although the Subcommittee found that one prisoner in solitary confinement had not been outside or had access to a means of communication for two days. 75. In some cases, solitary confinement is used as a prison management tool. At the Vilma Curling closed rehabilitation centre, the Subcommittee interviewed two persons deprived of their liberty who were being held in solitary confinement cells allegedly because they could not be relocated to any other cell block for fear they would be attacked. Although one of the prisoners suffered from multiple injuries, according to the prison doctor, no medical care had been provided since the prisoner’s placement in solitary confinement. 76. The Subcommittee recalls that solitary confinement is to be used only in exceptional circumstances, for strictly limited periods of time, and with medical supervision and court approval; it must not be used as a prison management tool. Under the Nelson Mandela Rules, solitary confinement must not exceed a time period of 15 consecutive days. Conditions in solitary confinement cells should be such as to respect the physical integrity and dignity of persons deprived of their liberty. Search procedures 77. In most of the prisons it visited, the Subcommittee heard numerous allegations as to the use of dormitory searches as a violent form of punishment, in which the prison personnel destroyed or confiscated the personal belongings of persons deprived of their liberty. In some prisons, the Subcommittee was informed that persons deprived of their liberty and/or their family members had been subjected to invasive and humiliating body searches. Several persons deprived of their liberty claimed to have been subjected to humiliating body cavity searches, on the pretext of searches for narcotics. 78. The Subcommittee recommends that the authorities take the necessary measures to ensure that searches are carried out in a non-violent manner and not with the aim of intimidating persons deprived of their liberty. The Subcommittee recommends that the State party ensure that search and entry procedures for visitors are not degrading and are governed by the Nelson Mandela Rules (rules 50–52 and 60). Rehabilitation programmes 79. The Subcommittee received information from the Ministry of Justice and Peace on the various programmes available in prisons. The Subcommittee does not have enough information to evaluate the regularity, reliability and reach (measured as the number of persons deprived of their liberty) of such programmes. However, the interviews conducted revealed a lack of sufficient and appropriate rehabilitation measures. Most of the persons interviewed had not been offered the opportunity to participate in physical, recreational, educational or work-related activities. 80. Costa Rica has introduced new “comprehensive rehabilitation units”. These units are in fact three prisons which, according to the Ministry of Justice and Peace, are designed to lower the risk of recidivism through a prison model that fosters social reintegration. The Subcommittee visited the Reinaldo Villalobos Zúñiga Unit and noted a significant contrast with the other prisons it had visited. The prison was clean and well-organized and the persons deprived of their liberty were not locked in their cell blocks. Few police officers were present in the educational centre and workshop areas; the Subcommittee was informed that the prison model emphasized dynamic security. Although some aspects could be improved, the Subcommittee found that, overall, it would be worthwhile replicating the rehabilitation model in other Costa Rican prisons. GE.21-00153 13