6. The consequences of referrals 6.1 Progress made within the framework of the handling of the cases referred 6.1.1 A few examples of local progress Access to the telephone on weekends in the solitary confinement wing After being informed that detainees placed in solitary confinement in an institution were not allowed to access the telephone booth on weekends, the Contrôleur général wished to find out the reasons for this restriction on the right to maintain connections with the exterior. In reply, the director stated that after verifying with his department, he was informed that the telephone booth installed in the solitary confinement wing was not connected to the SAGI network during the weekend; a connection request was made the the use of the telephone booth in the solitary confinement wing is now operational on weekends. The right to correspondence of patients hospitalised in seclusion rooms A case was referred to the CGLPL by a person under treatment without consent, placed in solitary confinement due to the risks to hurt himself/herself or others, who was unable to correspond with the people or authorities of his/her choice. This situation appeared to violate the right to correspondence and especially the provisions of Article L. 3211-3 of the Public Health Code, which states that a person affected by mental disorders, hospitalised without consent, must be able to benefit “under any circumstances (...) from the right to communicate (...) to send and receive mail”. Therefore, the CGLPL recommended, as regards sending letters, that hospital staff should make themselves available to patients under restraints, so that they can dictate the letters that they wish to write, or that recourse should be provided to any other means that allows reconciling the security requirements of the healthcare staff and the other patients, with the right to correspondence of hospitalised patients. Following the recommendation issued by the Contrôleur général, the management of the hospital enacted a new circular addressed to the healthcare teams, which mentioned the need to ensure that there is no restriction or deferment of the right to issue to receive mail for any hospitalised patient. Thus, it was specified that if patients were placed in solitary confinement under physical restraints, they could dictate the letters that they wished to write, so that their right to issue mail is protected in all circumstances. The obligation to postmark internal correspondence in detention Several detainees questioned the obligation imposed on them to postmark internal correspondence. The Contrôleur général wished to know the reasons for which this rule was implemented. In reply, the head of the institution specified that the obligation to postmark internal correspondence concerned only mail sent to another detention wing, to ensure that they would not be passed fraudulently during the mixed activities. This practice constitutes a breach of equality between detainees, since exchanging letters within the same wing does not require pasting a stamp on the said letters. The CGLPL recommended implementing an internal procedure - such as the provision of a dedicated letterbox, the contents of which will be collected by the mail officer - which allows 59