50 Sent-in patients lived in an extremely unstimulating environment; practically no leisure activities were organized for them. Since the buildings of the FPMI are not barrier-free, not everyone had access to open air. I requested the Director General of the Hungarian Prison Service and the Chief Medical Director to ensure the accessibility of the FPMI’s premises and the provision of therapeutic and leisure activities of adequate quantity and quality. I asked the Chief Medical Director to consider introducing, in addition to the existing mixed-gender activities, new, gender-specific activities. I suggested that the Chief Medical Director should make it possible (but not compulsory) for all patients to stay on the open air and to engage in therapeutic, sports and other activities. In violation of the relevant legal regulations,160 it was not possible to deliver packages during visiting time. Although patients could initiate outgoing phone calls with the frequency and duration stipulated in the regime rules, they could not, in violation of the law, receive incoming calls.161 In order to redress this unlawful situation, I requested the Director General of the Hungarian Prison Service and the Chief Medical Director to take the necessary measures. The FPMI failed to duly comply with the Prison Code’s provisions on corresponding with the defense counsel and the human rights organizations specified by the law, 162 and the information material entitled “General information on correspondence” also failed to duly present them. I also requested the prosecution service to conduct an inquiry into the issues of correspondence and sending packages. Although the number of admitted patients had not grown, the conditions necessary for terminating compulsory treatment (the protective environment) were less and less ensured. Due to the small number of social care institutions, and in the absence of receiving families, the issue of adaptive leaves for patients under compulsory treatment was not settled; neither was the release of those who did not need such treatment anymore. I requested the Minister of Justice to consider, in cooperation with the Ministers of Interior and Human Capacities, the establishment of an inter-professional working group for remedying the systemic problems uncovered by the visit. The patients interviewed during the visit did not know the patients’ rights representative; there were patients who did not know who the representative was. I asked the Chief Medical Director to include in the house rules the patients’ right to turn to the patients’ rights representative, and to allow the patients’ rights representative to gather information on the premises, interview and consult with the personnel and the patients. I also suggested that the Chief Medical Director should provide the patients’ rights representative with a room for performing the representative’s tasks. I requested the Director General of the National Center for Patients’ Rights and Documentation to ensure that the patients’ rights representative of the FPMI performed his/her tasks in accordance with the relevant legal provisions. The visiting delegation got contradictory information as regards the cases of abuse and the proceedings initiated against the alleged abusers. In my report, I emphasized that the FPMI should do everything in its power in order to prevent torture, inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment, and asked the Chief Medical Director to regularly bring to the attention of the FPMI’s nursing and security staff that physically abusing the patients is unacceptable and liable to disciplinary sanctions. Section 13(3) of the FPMI Decree Pursuant to Section 332(1)c) of the Prison Code, „when maintaining contact with their relatives and persons authorized by the FPMI, patients shall be entitled to […] receive phone calls once per week, in accordance with the institution’s regime, for at least twenty minutes per occasion,” and, pursuant to Section 398(3) of the Prison Code, „in order to exercise the procedural rights of the pretrial detainee, the defense counsel shall be entitled, once a week, in accordance with the house rules of the detention facility, to initiate a phone conversation for the period of one hour”. 162 Pursuant to Section 174(4) of the Prison Code, „The contents of the convict’s correspondence with the authorities, international human rights organizations recognized by an international instrument promulgated by an Act, the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights, the organization or staff of the National Preventive Mechanism, and the convict’s defense counsel may not be checked. If there is good reason to believe that the letters received or sent by the convict are not, in fact, sent by the authority, international organization, or defense counsel indicated on the envelop or meant to the addressee, the envelop shall be opened in the convict’s presence, simultaneously with recording the procedure. Checking may only serve the identification of the real sender.” 160 161