to go. Very often, the law remains less than desirable, as is the case of the right to work in prison. Sometimes, it has evolved, but is yet to become fully effective, as is the case in providing access to a lawyer in custody or the information of patients hospitalised without consent. More seriously, access to healthcare for imprisoned persons remains a source of great difficulty and the principle of equality of access to healthcare, established more than twenty years ago by the Law dated 18 January 1994 pertaining to public health and social protection, is still not respected. However, it is unacceptable that the CGLPL makes the same observations, denounces the same failures and formulates the same recommendations in every single domain that it monitors. In fact, prison overcrowding remains abnormally high, hospitalised prisoners continue to be treated while handcuffed or shackled and in the presence of prison guards, and therefore decide to give up on healthcare, holding cells are not maintained and the teams assigned to look after minors are still not systematically stabilised and trained. The list of violations of the rights of persons deprived of liberty is even longer. This is why the CGLPL decided to implement a tool that allows assessing the implementation of its recommendations, so that the public authorities are able to ensure their monitoring and application. The requirement of respecting the rights and dignity of those deprived of liberty is a neverending battle. The CGLPL will continue to fight it, fully embracing the concept of this “active intolerance”, as spoken by Michel Foucault. Adeline HAZAN 13