CHANCELLOR OF JUSTICE AS THE PREVENTIVE MECHANISM The Chancellor also referred to this problem in the summaries of inspection visits to the police detention centre of the North Prefecture and the detention chambers in Jõhvi and Kuressaare. In today’s custodial system in Estonia it is inevitable that, instead of a pre-trial detention facility, persons remanded in custody are also temporarily held in police detention centres. It is also obvious that police detention centres are not able to ensure to persons remanded in custody for up to six months (or even longer as a defendant) all the rights prescribed by legislation. The main problem is providing access to health care, exercise in open air, and in some cases also the possibility to continue acquiring education. In the current situation, the Chancellor of Justice found that the maximum acceptable duration of stay in police facilities by a person remanded in custody is one month. The Chancellor is aware that the stay of persons remanded in custody in police detention facilities is not a problem directly caused by the police, but the difficulty lies in cooperation between the police and prisons, which is often affected by constantly high occupancy rates of pre-trial custody wards of prisons. Due to this, the Chancellor proposed to the Police and Border Guard Board that together with the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Ministry of Justice they should try to find possibilities to limit the time of stay of persons remanded in custody in police detention centres to one month. In response to the Chancellor’s proposal, the Police and Border Guard Board explained that implementing the proposal depends on the availability of places in prisons. Sometimes a person remanded in custody cannot be transferred from a police detention facility to a prison within one month because, for example, the authority conducting the criminal proceedings has requested that the person should be kept in the police facility. Usually, however, the problem does lie in the high occupancy rates of pre-trial custody wards in prisons. The inspection visits showed than in comparison to 2009 the situation has improved with regard to introducing to detainees their rights and duties and notifying the persons close to the detainees. In 2009, the Chancellor found shortcomings with regard to these issues during many inspection visits. The situation has definitely improved due to the constant awareness rising activities by the Police and Border Guard Board in police prefectures and drawing up and making available relevant guidance materials and a brief information package on the rights and duties of detainees. In addition to the above, during the inspection visit to the sobering-up facility and the detention centre of the North Prefecture at the end of the year the Chancellor paid special attention to fire safety by involving experts from the Rescue Service Board. The Chancellor definitely intends to continue this practice in 2011. It also deserves mentioning that largely on the basis of the results of the inspection visit to the sobering-up facility of the North Prefecture, the Chancellor carried out an analysis of the lawfulness of the use of the restraint bed. The Chancellor ascertained the conditions which should be complied with when using the restraint bed. As restraint beds are also used as a means of restraint in prisons, the Chancellor also sent his opinion to the Minister of Justice. The following section provides a brief overview of other shortcomings found during each inspection visit but not mentioned above as they cannot be directly considered an overall problem common for all police detention centres. 2. Inspection visit to Haapsalu and Kärdla detention chambers of the public order bureau of the West Prefecture On 22 April 2010, advisers to the Chancellor of Justice carried out unannounced visits to Haapsalu and Kärdla detention chambers of the public order bureau of the West Prefecture. 24 In the summary of the inspection visit, the Chancellor dealt with the general issues described above − unsatisfactory living conditions, organisation of supervision and the duration of the stay of detained persons in Haapsalu detention chamber, as well as issues of health care. The examination of personal files of detain-