full confidentiality, although some may be prevented by the magistrate in charge of their 313 case to call family members. In other countries, the frequency and duration of visits and phone calls with families and friends are restricted, monitored in sight and hearing, or 314 even recorded. Where (suspected) violent extremist prisoners are subjected to constant surveillance and not permitted to have un-monitored visits, which, for example, also makes conjugal visits 315 impossible, this can have profound detrimental impact on their family relations. The review and censoring of incoming and outgoing written correspondence also appear to 316 be a common feature of stricter detention regimes. These various restrictions are also compounded in certain cases by lengthy and strict approval procedures that impede or delay prisoners’ contacts with the outside world, particularly in the early weeks of detention. Even when such contacts are allowed, there are reports that some prisoners refrain from communicating and meeting with families to avoid having to subject them 317 to screening, monitoring and other security procedures, in particular if these include invasive body searches. Restrictions on physical contact can also result in parents not 318 being able to touch or hold their children – of particular concern when such restrictions are not based on individualized risk assessments. Privileged lawyer-client relationship International human rights standards protect the right of all detainees, including pre-trial detainees, to be provided with adequate opportunities, time and facilities to receive visits from and communicate and consult with a legal adviser of their own choice, without delay, 313 This is, for instance, the case in most of the five “dedicated units” put in place in France to house prisoners accused or convicted of terrorism- and violent extremism-related offences. See “Radicalisation islamiste en milieu carcéral: les unités dédiées ouvertes en 2016”, op. cit., note 108. 314 Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on Counter-Terrorism, Visit to Kazakhstan, op. cit., note 108: “36. In Taldykorgan prison, the Special Rapporteur visited parts of the prison and met with a number of prisoners charged with a variety of offences related to terrorism and extremism. The prisoners visited were held in a specific prison wing.(…) Only some of the prisoners had family visits during the period of their stay, the length of which in some cases was extensive. All were equally distressed at the absence of consistent, regular and sufficiently long visits, which affected their familial and parental relationships”; Report to the Italian Government on the Visit to Italy Carried Out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 12 to 22 March 2019: “48 (…) The special regime consists of the segregation in small groups of up to a maximum of four persons, who can associate together for two hours per day (generally one hour of outdoor exercise and one hour in a community room). Serious limitations are imposed on prisoners’ contact with the outside world: one one-hour visit per month with a family member, under closed conditions and with audio surveillance and video-recording or, alternatively, a ten-minute telephone call per month if a visit cannot take place during the same period.” 315 These are limitations observed in the TA in the Netherlands, see: Amnesty International and Open Society Justice Initiative, “Inhuman and Unnecessary Human Rights Violations in Dutch High-Security Prisons in the Context of Counter Terrorism”, op. cit., note 106, pp. 47-48, 51. 316 Such observations were made both in relation to the French “dedicated units” and the Dutch TA. See “Radicalisation islamiste en milieu carcéral: les unités dédiées ouvertes en 2016”, op. cit., note 108; Amnesty International and Open Society Justice Initiative, “Inhuman and Unnecessary Human Rights Violations in Dutch High-Security Prisons in the Context of Counter Terrorism”, op. cit., note 106, p. 47. 317 Amnesty International and Open Society Justice Initiative, “Inhuman and Unnecessary Human Rights Violations in Dutch High-Security Prisons in the Context of Counter Terrorism”, ibid., p. 48. 318 Ibid., p. 42-43. 67