FACTSHEET • Is there a regulation stipulating how long footage can be stored? If so, how is this done in practice? If not, how long are recordings kept in practice? • Is there a call-bell in the cells equipped with CCTV? prevention of ill-treatment, as gendarmes are absent at night,14 and violent incidents amongst detainees and suicide attempts quite often take place during this time. • Are law enforcement officials instructed in the use, storage and destruction of data? If so, are they well informed about these issues? • Can detainees and their counsel access footage? If so, are they entitled to view, listen and copy it if they wish? 3.3 Type of institutions equipped with CCTV and regulations in place Given the relative novelty of CCTV monitoring systems, in many countries their use has not yet been regulated, or only partially. Laws or decrees regulating the use of CCTV in public areas usually include the right to information for persons recorded, including the possibility to access images and to ask for their destruction. However, in many countries the legal framework does not apply to the use of this technology in places of deprivation of liberty, including police stations. A lack of regulatory framework is detrimental to the rights of persons in police custody in various ways. Risks involve violations of the right to privacy, both through intrusive video-recording and the lack of confidentiality which can result from the absence of management and supervision of recorded footage. The lack of regulation can also lead to arbitrariness in the use of CCTV. In some places police interrogations are video- recorded only when persons are detained under specific laws, such as for offences against the state or drug trafficking.15 Where this is the case, persons arrested for other offences do not enjoy the protection provided by video-recording. Whenever there is a regulation for the use of CCTV in places under the authority of the police, it should provide a clear set of provisions, which cover the duty to inform persons that they are in an area where CCTV is being used; the responsibilities and chain of command regarding viewing, storing and destruction of data; as well as the access to data by detainees and their counsels. The benefits of recording should be carefully balanced with the right to privacy, and protection provided by CCTV should be granted without discrimination. Regulations should always stipulate who has access to images. If there is any footage involving nudity, the regulation should stipulate that only a person of the same gender should have access to the footage. What could monitoring bodies check? • Is there a regulation governing the use of CCTV? At the national/local/place of detention level? • If there is a regulation, is there a specific provision In Slovenia, audio/video recording was found not to be systematically used by police officers because there was ‘no special requirement in the law to do so’.13 or a specific act for audio-video recording in police stations and police vehicles? • If there is a regulation, what are the provisions relating to the right to privacy and to the management of the information recorded? • If there is a regulation, are there specific provisions regarding gender issues? Even within one country, use of CCTV may be arbitrary, with some police stations fully equipped with a sophisticated CCTV monitoring system and others not monitored at all. • Are some state institutions better equipped with CCTV than others (eg. police vs. gendarmerie)? If so, for what reasons? • Is the CCTV monitoring system used as a way to compensate for a shortage of staff? In France, where most police functions are assumed either by the police or by the gendarmerie, very few cameras are installed in places under the authority of the gendarmerie. However, the use of CCTV may in fact be more relevant in gendarmeries from the perspective of • Are detainees informed of the existence of a CCTV monitoring system and how is the information managed? • Are all interrogations video and audio- recorded? • Are there specific offences for which video- recording is not provided during police interrogation? If so, for what reasons? 13. Ibid. 14. See Contrôleur général des lieux de privation de liberté, Rapport d’activité 2012, p39. Available at: http://www.cglpl.fr/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/ CGLPL_ Rapport-2012_version-WEB.pdf <accessed 23 October 2013>. 15. See for example the CPT’s visit to Ireland in 2006, [CPT/Inf (2007) 40], para. 19-20, pp14-15. Penal Reform International | Video recording in police custody: Addressing risk factors to prevent torture and ill-treatment |5