155.Statistics provided by the authorities indicated that 81% of all prisoners were in custodial remand. According to the statistics provided by the prison authorities to the delegation at the time of the visit, in Cotonou Prison, only 8.75% of the total prison population had been convicted. In Abomey Prison, over 80% of the adult prisoners had not yet been convicted. The delegation noted that no detailed statistics were kept for the adolescent detainees, so that it is impossible for the authorities to know how many of them were sentenced or on remand. 156.The delegation met prisoners who said that they had been on remand for years. At Abomey Prison, examination of the records indicated that a large number of remand prisoners had been in prison for years. According to the registers examined, a detainee present at the time of the visit had been held on remand in prison since 22 October 1993. The delegation selected at random two remand prisoners who had been in the prison for over 3 years. One reported and was recorded as having been in prison for 4 years and 1 month, the other reported that he had been in Abomey Prison for seven years; he said that he had not been to a hearing in four years. The delegation asked the staff in charge of documentation at the prison to identify the prisoner’s case in the files, but they were unable to find any trace of him. 157.Some remand prisoners at Abomey Prison reported that, instead of being taken to appear in court for a prolongation, they were asked to sign a document requesting release; this was taken to the court and returned with the indication ‘refusé’. To the SPT’s knowledge, there is no provision in law for extensions of remand in custody to be handled as a paper exercise. The SPT requests the authorities to confirm that the procedure as described is not in conformity with the law. Appearance in court for a decision as to continued deprivation of liberty is an important safeguard against ill-treatment. The SPT recommends that in all such instances the prisoner be brought before the court. 158.Long periods of pre-trial custody contribute to overcrowding in prisons, exacerbating the existing problems as regards conditions and relations between the detainees and staff; they also add to the burden on the courts. From the standpoint of preventing illtreatment, this raises serious concerns for a system already showing signs of stress. 159.The delegation received reports that many prisoners on remand had been held for periods far exceeding the maximum penalty of imprisonment to which they could be sentenced if convicted of the offence with which they stood accused. This state of affairs is not in conformity with the rule of law. It is clearly arguable that remand prisoners, who are to be presumed innocent, should not be in a worse situation than prisoners sentenced for offences of which the remand prisoners stand accused: sentenced prisoners are eligible to be considered for discretionary release through a judicial process. There can be no justification for holding remand prisoners beyond the period equivalent to the maximum sentence imposable for the offence of which they stand accused. The SPT was informed of a past innovative pilot programme to identify all remand prisoners in this situation, with a view to arranging for their immediate release. 160. The SPT recommends that a permanent system be set up for the regular review of the time served on remand by prisoners in Benin with a view to releasing from custody all who have served time in excess of the maximum term imposable for the offence with which they are charged. 161.In this regard, the lack of clear and comprehensive registers makes it difficult to ascertain with any certainty the length of time any detainee has spent on remand. Losing track of prisoners or lack of information about their penal status appeared to be a frequent cause for overstaying on remand. (b)Registers 162.A major challenge facing the prison authorities is the keeping of accurate and proper registers, as indicated above. Article 575 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that each prison should keep a registre d ’ écrou, which should record arrest warrants, judgments and release dates for each detainee. Further, Decree No. 73-293 provides for a long list of registers which should be kept by prison registrars, whereas the situation is in reality very different. 163.At Cotonou prison, in addition to some of the above paper registers, the delegation was shown a computer system which recorded all major events for each detainee, and was thorough, except for the time of arrival and departure from the prison. The computer system allowed the delegation to search by name and the delegation was able to cross check the information in paper registers. The SPT welcomes the computerised database which exists at Cotonou Prison, and which enables the registrar (greffe) to see how long each detainee has been at the Prison (see further below). However, Cotonou is the only prison which has such a system, albeit in basic Excel format. The SPT recommends that all prisons in Benin be provided with at least one computer, that a standard national database be set up which will enable the authorities to track each detainee, and that this software be also rolled out to the courts, as well as centrally at ministerial level. All users should receive appropriate training. Computerised data systems have the capacity to signal whenever a legal time limit has been reached; this is a potentially important tool in preventing lengthy pre-trial detention. 164.At Abomey prison, the records were still kept exclusively in paper format, and the delegation came across numerous gaps and inconsistencies. Some registers relating to certain time periods were missing completely, while others were not updated. The delegation examined registers for 2004 and 2005, and noted that, whereas some detainees accused of small thefts were still awaiting trial from that period, others, who had committed graver crimes more recently, had already been sentenced and released. 165.An issue highlighted by the registrars at both Cotonou and Abomey Prisons was that information, including release orders, was often not forwarded by the Palais de Justice: for example, a case might be transferred to a Cabinet, but if the information never reached the prison, the detainee’s file was lost for all intent and purposes. As detainees only had a copy of the committal order (mandat de dépôt), it was often hard to trace which stage of the procedure the case had reached. The lack of telephone at Abomey Prison made it even harder to receive information from the Palais de Justice. The delegation was informed that the registrar at Abomey Prison had recently been requested by the Ministry of Justice to forward a list of sentenced prisoners who would be eligible