assuming that this is really the intended objective, to a very small number of foreigners actually becoming eligible for deportation. On the other hand, as already pointed out23, the disadvantages resulting from this extension for foreigners who are not deported are considerable (loss of employment and accommodation) and deeply destabilising, out of all proportion to the charges against them. An even more critical view should be taken of prefectural services which, even after having been finally informed that a foreigner cannot be deported (usually due to a final refusal on the part of the destination country to issue the necessary travel documents), refuse to lift detention measures until the full period thereof (forty-five days) has expired. One cannot content oneself with the fact that, in such scenarios, in accordance with the instructions given by the Constitutional Council of France (no. 2003-484 DC of 20th November 2003, § 63 et seq.), remedies before a judge continue to be guaranteed. The vain maintenance of this guarantee is the mark of total indifference towards the person’s interests, and above all a flagrant violation of the law, which only provides for detention of foreigners “who cannot immediately leave French territory”: when it emerges, in an indisputable manner, that the foreigner “can no longer leave” the territory within a specific deadline, detention is no longer possible. Since the latter is an exceptional measure, it is only acceptable in the limited cases defined by law. 2.2 Police Custody Facilities 2.2.1 Police Facilities The number of police custody facilities inspected by the Contrôle Général allows it to set out a comparative analysis of police stations and headquarters, for which the reports were sent to the Ministry of the Interior in 2013, rather than giving a reminder of its recommendations in a descriptive manner. A number of typical orders of magnitude have thus been distinguished for the institutions inspected. These are far from reflecting the manner in which fundamental rights are respected in the places inspected, in either quantitative or qualitative terms. They do not show data, which the inspectors always collect, concerning calls for doctors and lawyers and, of course, requests by persons in police custody to have close relations and employers informed of their situation, and the time within which these calls and notifications are carried out. However, on the one hand, the figures below shed light on the data concerning police custody in a certain number of very different police districts and, on the other hand, on the manner in which placements in police custody proceed. 2.2.1.1 Quantitative Data concerning Police Custody For greater clearness, the data has been divided into two tables, concerning fifteen towns. Amiens 2009 Rate of PI 29.6°/00 23 Ibid. 29 Angers 2009 23.2°/00 Chartres 2009 Chessy 2009 Douai 2009 20.2°/00 84°/00 11.2°/00 Metz 2010 21°/00 Montereau 2010 26°/00 Niort 2010 19.5°/°°