CAT/C/NLD/CO/5-6 Convention and regularly assess the impact and effectiveness of such training measures in order to prevent the acts of torture, ill-treatment and violence. Pretrial detention 20. The Committee is concerned at the high percentage (38 per cent) of pretrial detainees in the Netherlands, and the little consideration of alternatives to pretrial detention. The Committee is also concerned that pretrial detention does not serve as a measure of last resort; instead it was reported that a bill is currently discussed in Parliament which may lead to the further extension of the grounds for pretrial detention for up to seventeen days before a hearing takes place. In addition, the Committee is concerned about the State party’s response that the nature of sentencing is generally lenient. This was not considered by the Committee as a convincing argument, especially in light of the absence of commitment to reduce the use of pretrial detention. The Committee further observes with concern the absence of systems to obtain disaggregated data about the composition of detainee population. Finally, the Committee is concerned at the length of pre-trial detention in Aruba (up to 116 days) and in Curacao (up to 116 days, and 146 days in the event of preliminary judicial investigation), which can be exceptionally extended (arts. 2 and 11). The State party should take appropriate measures to reduce the use of pretrial detention and to ensure that the decisions imposing pretrial detention are duly substantiated. The State party should use the pretrial detention as a measure of last resort, consider alternative measures to its use and observe presumption of innocence. The State party should also establish systems to obtain disaggregated data about the composition of detainee population to avoid disproportionate representation of minorities. In addition, the Governments of Aruba and Curacao should review criminal legislation to further shorten the length of pretrial detention and guarantee the suspects the right to be brought before a judge within one or two days from the arrest. Forced internment in mental health care 21. The Committee is concerned at the high numbers of persons with mental and psychosocial disabilities who are held in mental health care institutions on an involuntary basis, often for a lengthy period of time. The Committee is further concerned at the frequent use of solitary confinement, restraints and forced medication which may amount to inhumane and degrading treatment. Taking into account the information received during the consideration of the report on plans regarding mental health care, the Committee remains concerned at the lack of focus on alternatives to hospitalization of persons with mental and psychosocial disabilities. Finally, the Committee is concerned about the frequent lack of effective and impartial investigation of the excessive use of restrictive measures in mental health-care institutions (arts. 2, 11, 13 and 16). The Committee recommends to the State party to: (a) Develop alternative measures to reduce the number of forcibly interned persons with mental and psychosocial disabilities and ensure that involuntary internments in places of deprivation of liberty, including psychiatric and social care institutions, are done on the basis of a legal decision, guaranteeing all effective legal safeguards; (b) Strengthen the possibilities for appeal of decisions and effective access to complaint mechanisms for interned persons; (c) Use restraints and solitary confinement as a measure of last resort when all other alternatives for control have failed, for the shortest possible time and under strict medical supervision; 7