VISITS BY THE JOINT COMMISSION menting cell checks. The intervals between the required checks (depending on who is being checked on) are entered in the programme. Once these intervals are exceeded and the time of the check is not entered, officers are reminded to carry out the check by means of a red blinking light. The reason why checks are carried out late must be justified in writing. These data cannot be changed afterwards. to be fitted with a CCTV camera for such cases or for the cameras not to be switched on all the time. Further, the Joint Commission would like to point out that CCTV monitoring must on no account be a substitute for regular, direct cell checks by duty officers, and that it can at most be used to supplement such checks. The delegation was informed during its visit that the cells are often only checked using the CCTV cameras, since officers are sometimes alone in the station at night and cannot therefore carry out checks in person. Entries made in the custody record book confirmed this, as only the word “camera” was entered next to the time. This is not sufficient for an effective check of the cells. The Joint Commission recommends ensuring that regular direct checks are carried out in the custody suite. CCTV monitoring should in future only be applied in justified individual cases, and such use should be documented and justified. Response: The signs (pictogrammes) which ought to indicate that CCTV monitoring is in operation in the custody cells have now been installed. There is no continuous CCTV monitoring; such monitoring is only done to the extent provided by law and only where the requirements set out in the Prison Act are met. People are often taken into police custody because they represent a danger to themselves or to others. Often they are drunk and/or aggressive. In such cases continuous CCTV monitoring primarily serves to protect detainees (e.g. in case of the risk of suicide or to monitor their physical state) and police officers (e.g. against aggressive and rowdy behaviour). Continuous CCTV monitoring guarantees that officers are able to recognise and prevent self-harm or a deterioration in a person’s physical state at an early stage and thus enable early intervention. Where a detainee is showing aggressive behaviour, staff can then be deployed appropriately during personal cell checks. Especially when there are indications of possible health risks and the person concerned is asleep or resting, a personal check in addition to regular monitoring of vital functions is indicated. In such cases CCTV monitoring thus serves to fulfil the state’s duty of protection. If breached, the responsible police officers might possibly face criminal prosecution. Especially in the case of detainees whose volition is restricted and/or who show signs of being at risk of self-harm, these duties comprise as uninterrupted an optical surveillance as possible. The Federal Court of Justice, for instance, expressly ruled that carrying out checks every 30 minutes is not sufficient and that instead continuous optical surveillance was necessary and that, if this is not done, then a breach of duty has occurred (Federal Court of Justice, judgment of 4 September 2014, file no. 4 StR 473/13, margin no. 37). The Ministry does not deny that CCTV monitoring represents interference with the detained person’s personal right. However, for the aforementioned reasons, this interference is 4.2.2 – Winnenden Police Station, 29 July 2014 The Joint Commission visited Winnenden Police Station on 29 July 2014. The visiting delegation inspected the three custody cells and inspected the custody record books. At the time of the visit no-one was being detained in custody. Recommendations and response All three cells in Winnenden Police Station are equipped with CCTV cameras, which are visible. All those taken into custody are subject to continuous CCTV monitoring. A red light on the camera indicates whether it is on or off. According to police officers, in accordance with section 21 (5) of the Police Act in conjunction with no. 4.4 of the Police Custody Regulations, they inform detainees that video surveillance is in operation. Given that some of those taken into custody are in no state to be able to understand what they are being told, the Joint Commission recommends that notices be available containing this information or pictogrammes, which the Ministry of the Interior said it would be procuring in a letter dated 29 May 2013 (ref. 3-0525/54). At the moment there is only a small, hardly visible sign in the anteroom to the cells between the second and third door. This is a relic from when only one cell was equipped with a CCTV camera. However, the other cells were retrofitted with CCTV cameras. The Joint Commission is of the opinion that CCTV monitoring of police cells is only permitted in justified and documented individual cases. Continuous surveillance requires separate justification. The need to examine each individual case is also set out in the detailed requirements in the Baden-Württemberg Police Custody Regulations. Pursuant to no. 4.3 of the Custody Regulations, “the number of checks and the times when they are to be carried out is based on the circumstances of each individual case. [...] Special circumstances (e.g. a person not being fit to be kept in prison – cf. no. 2.1.2, Physical restraints – cf. no. 4.6) may necessitate that the intervals between checks be shortened so far as to constitute constant observation.” Constant observation, as is carried out using the CCTV camera, is, thus, only possible in exceptional cases, for example when a person is extremely drunk. It therefore appears sufficient for only one of the cells 50