8. Long‑standing issues in effective prevention of ill-treatment Recording and reporting medical findings of ill-treatment is lacking Methodical recording of injuries of persons restricted in freedom and reporting the cases to the competent authorities will substantially contribute to combatting ill-treatment. The systematic visits indicated that the medical reports on examination and treatment lack the parameters required for investigation; in extreme cases, the examination is limited to several questions placed in the presence of a police officer. This is true of police detention, imprisonment and detention of foreigners, and there is also a danger of such a practice in initial examinations in psychiatric hospitals. The reason lies in the low awareness of the 1999 Istanbul Protocol (The Manual on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment). permit a physician, without the patient’s consent, to submit findings on marks of ill-treatment to authorities competent to investigate. Since 2015, remedy has been lacking due to inactivity of the Ministry of Health. It is necessary to modify the Health Care Services Act so that a report on findings of marks of ill-treatment does not represent violation of the physician’s duty of confidentiality. Furthermore, it is necessary to initiate a professional debate so that physicians accept their role in combatting ill-treatment with understanding and without endangering the physician-patient relationship. The statutory requirement for confidentiality in connec­tion with health care services then does not Criminal punishment of degrading treatment is complicated and sometimes impossible Torture and other inhuman and cruel treatment constitutes a crime pursuant to Article 149 of the Criminal Code. However, the Criminal Code does not specifically mention degrading treatment, which means it can only by punished if it features elements of the bodies of other crimes, based on the type of behaviour or omissions on the part of the perpetrator. Nonetheless, for example in the field of social and health care services, the Public Defender of Rights most frequently encounters flaws that attain the level of degrading treatment. A specific feature lies in the fact that degrading treat­ ment does not necessarily inflict physical harm and can be caused by a number of less severe actions with combined effect. This complicates criminal punishment. It is necessary to review the Criminal Code and sectoral laws so as to ensure that no form of intentional degrading treatment remains unpunishable. Interference with the dignity of recipients of social services and patients cannot be penalised by administrative punishment, either The Social Services Act provides for administrative punishment of social service providers in case of non-compliance with formalities, but defines no infraction covering often serious interferences with privacy, safety, integrity and dignity of service users. In the area of health care services, the situation is even worse, as no infractions apply to the use of means of restraint. This results in non-punishability of less serious forms of ill-treatment and low respect towards control bodies. It is necessary to supplement the list of infractions in the Social Services Act and in the Health Care Services Act. See the Defender’s summary report of 2017 25