organised, and agreements should provide specific details of how services are to be supplied and financed (should preference be given to the reimbursement of invoices passed on by the border police or, on the contrary, to direct organisation by the carriers of services defined as being those provided for ordinary passengers?). It is recommended that firm national instructions should be issued on this question. 2.1.2.2.4 The Provision of Information on Legal Rules in Waiting areas All persons deprived of liberty have the right to be informed of the rules applicable to them. In general, the situation is disappointing in this respect, especially when, rather than examining the legal “theory”, attention is focused on the concrete application that is made thereof. In the first place, action is required with regard to the rules of procedure. In too many of the waiting areas inspected, these rules are either inaccessible, or correspond to stereotyped models lacking local provisions - which are nevertheless necessary - or only exist in the French language. All persons “held” should be able to inform themselves of the specific rules in force, in a language that they understand. It should be possible to consider that linguistic requirements have been satisfied when the rules of procedure are translated and displayed in the six languages recognised as being those in use by the United Nations (Security Council) 48 except when another language is very predominant in the waiting zone in question. Secondly, action is also required as far as unaccompanied minors are concerned. Apart from Roissy, the arrival of unaccompanied minors is exceptional (at Lyon, two cases in the course of one year). Without here repeating the whole of the issues developed in depth, in particular by the independent authority charged with the defence and promotion of children’s rights (Défenseur des enfants), it is necessary to pay particular attention to the rapidity with which an appropriate guardian is appointed by a public prosecutor at a court of first instance (procureur de la République) (article L. 221-5 of the Code for Entry and Residence of Foreigners and Right of Asylum), to ensuring effective access to the child for the person thus appointed, to ensuring the latter’s involvement in decisions taken concerning the child and to the precautions to be taken when the child is admitted to French territory. In the third place, action is also required with regard to the keeping of the register, not, of course, the register mentioned above which has not yet been created, but rather the register that is provided for by law, which has to be kept in waiting areas. Unfortunately, the situation in waiting areas does not differ greatly from the practices observed in too many police custody facilities. In one inspection it was noted that twenty-three foreigners had been held in one waiting zone in the course of the previous year. Although information was available with regard what happened to nineteen of them (eighteen removed and one released), the fate of the last four was unknown, in the absence of sufficient information. These uncertainties are a source of confusion with regard to the way in which, after all is said and done, the flux of persons refused entry to the country and placed in waiting areas is recorded. However, above all, they render any internal or external inspection difficult, or even impossible. Lastly, action needs to be taken in order to allow persons held to make contact with associations for the defence of foreigners. In none of the zones inspected (apart from Roissy) is provision made for the regular presence of a humanitarian association, such as those mentioned under article L.223-1 of the CESEDA (though some of them make occasional visits). However, in many waiting areas, telephone contact details for such associations are displayed, as well as a list of lawyers at the local Bar. These practices are useful and should be brought into general use. 48 English, Arabic, (Mandarin) Chinese, Spanish, French and Russian. 29