opcat inspections 2011–2014 for a patient to be given – voluntarily or forcibly – ECT treatment outside of the county council’s care facilities.37 Below is a summary of the observations made during one inspection. Observations during the inspection of a compulsory psychiatric care facility The care environment’s significance to patients38 Patients in compulsory psychiatric care are in a vulnerable situation. The care environment is of particular significance as the patients, in practice, live at the care facility, and the care environment becomes part of their living environment. It is vital that attention is paid to the care environment when planning the provision of such services. During an inspection of the psychiatric department at Visby Hospital, it was found that there were limited opportunities for offering patients who are receiving care pursuant to the LPT something to occupy themselves with. Furthermore, the opportunities for physical exercise were poor and there was, in practice, no opportunity to obtain occupational therapy since this is granted only after a referral is processed. It also emerged that the processing of referrals almost always took so long that the compulsory care of the individual had ceased before the decision on occupational therapy had been made. The Parliamentary Ombudsman found the system in place at the department in question to be unsatisfactory and emphasised that it was vital that Region Gotland make it possible for the clinic to offer patients a real opportunity to occupy themselves. The Parliamentary Ombudsman also gave a reminder that the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT), following its visit to Sweden in 2009, had stressed the importance of care containing both therapy and exercise as well as other forms of occupation.39 Migration Agency detention units General background The Swedish Migration Agency has five detention units: Åstorp, Märsta, Kållered, Flen and Gävle. A case in which an alien has been detained is processed either by the Swedish Migration Agency or the Police Authority. Until 2009, the Parliamentary Ombudsmen had not inspected the Migration Agency’s detention units. In one year (2010), visits were made to all detention units as part of a special project that was reported on in a decision in May 2011. The Parliamentary Ombudsman’s decision criticised the Migration Agency for shortcomings that included having placed of detainees who pose only a danger to themselves on remand without legal support and having incorrectly 37 Ref. no. 1491-2013, ref. no. 3953-2013 38 Ref. no. 2756-2013 39 CPT Standards, Extract from the 12th General Report, p. 34 35