c) Prison Hospital During the visit to the Prison Hospital, special attention was given to the accommodation conditions. In two rooms prisoners complained that, because of the vertically passing heating pipes in their rooms, it is constantly hot, which is fine in the winter, but not in the summer. This issue was immediately presented to the head of the prison. During the visit we were notified that works were scheduled for the reconstruction of the heating and hot water system that will remove the observed shortcomings. In a follow-up inspection during an unannounced visit to the Prison Hospital, it was established that reconstruction works were finalized on the day of the visit, within which the previously joint heating and hot water system was split into two separate heating and hot water systems. As the Prison Hospital is a high security penitentiary, despite the fact that persons deprived of their liberty are here to receive medical treatment, smoking is permitted and sometimes smokers cannot be separated from non-smokers, of which several verbal complaints were received during the visit. The majority of rooms do not have a toilet so prisoners have to call judicial police officers for toilet visits. During the visit complaints were received about problems with specific judicial police officers who take much longer than the others to respond to the call, of which the Head of the Hospital Prison was warned. The hospital is still without an elevator so, when required, officers are carrying prisoners who are immobile or have seriously impaired mobility. As there are no special rooms for interviewing prisoners, other than in the forensic ward, treatment officers are performing interviews in the halls, which significantly reduces the quality of professional work. Moreover, during the visit special attention was also given to the use of means of physical restraint, that is, the reasons for deciding to use the means of restraint, and it was established that sometimes it is unclear whether a person is restrained because of his/her aggressive behaviour caused by mental illness or because of a disciplinary violation that was not caused by mental illness. Our position is that restraint is to be used exclusively in cases that involve events caused by a mental condition, which must be prescribed by regulations governing health care. To the contrary, any decision on sanctioning disciplinary violations not caused by a mental condition of the person deprived of liberty must be made in disciplinary proceedings and the mandated disciplinary measure should be performed accordingly. In addition, we feel it is necessary to mention that, as this is a high security penitentiary, prisoners who are treated here but serve their sentence in less stringent conditions (medium or minimum security) are de facto, for the purpose of their medical treatment, discriminated against. Moreover, nonforensic prisoners who came for medical treatment from other penal institutions or are awaiting examination or surgery in external hospitals retain only their rights under the EPSA, but not the benefits they have attained in their original penal institutions. Furthermore, it was established that persons deprived of their liberty had access to open air in a small (approx. 100 m2), wire-fenced, uncovered walking yard and therefore frequently do not exercise their right to two hours of stay in open air. Having in mind the size of the Prison