general observations in connection with inspections 39 sections, decisions on searches must be made in each individual case.56 One clinic was criticised by the Parliamentary Ombudsmen for having forced patients, over a long period of time, to pass through a security gate – which is a form of body search – and thereby having applied a system not compatible with the legislation.57 Patients who have been subject to coercive measures for a long period of time In connection with an inspection of a forensic psychiatry clinic, it was noted that two patients had been isolated for many years. They were sentenced in 1986 and 2003, respectively, to forensic psychiatric care. A third patient cared for pursuant to the Compulsory Psychiatric Care Act was staying at the clinic under conditions on a par with isolation and the patient was mostly strapped down. In the opinion of the Parliamentary Ombudsmen, what emerged concerning these patients raised questions about what other alternatives for care and treatment the clinic had considered. The Parliamentary Ombudsmen recommended that the clinic engage an independent expert and as such ensure that the patients in question received good care. It was noted that such a recommendation had already been submitted by the CPT. Following the inspection, the Parliamentary Ombudsmen received information that one of the patients at the clinic was no longer isolated. In its supervision, the Health and Social Care Inspectorate found that it was possible to cease the coercive measures and had also established that the measures taken were not permissible in one of the cases. Against this background, the Parliamentary Ombudsmen stated that there were grounds for continuing to monitor how the psychiatric clinics were dealing with these issues and how the Health and Social Care Inspectorate exercises its supervision.58 Opportunity to spend time outdoors on a daily basis On several occasions, the Parliamentary Ombudsmen has stated that the outset for compulsory psychiatric care and forensic psychiatric care should be that a patient is allowed the opportunity to spend at least one hour outdoors every day. Similar statements have also been made by the CPT.59 Despite this, it was noted that the opportunities for spending time outdoors are limited at certain clinics. During one inspection, it also emerged that spending time outdoors had been conditional on patients’ “conduct”.60 56 Ref. nos. 643-2015, 1350-2015 and 6308-2015. 57 Ref. no. 2222-2016. 58 Ref. no. 5556-2016. 59 See JO 2011/12 p.471 and CPT standards, CPT/Inf/E (2002) 1 – Rev. 2013, page 51, para 37. 60 Ref. no. 643-2015. It has been noted that the opportunities for spending time outdoors are limited at certain clinics. It has also emerged that spending time outdoors had been conditional on patients’ “conduct”.