PRE-DEPORTATION DETENTION FACILITIES Detainees are informed of the house rules by means of notices hung in the common room written in Arabic, English, French and Tamil. The rules also contain information about detainees’ rights. Some of this information is handed out when detainees are admitted in the form of a leaflet containing pictogrammes. The house rules regulate the community life of those accommodated in the facility and can help to prevent conflicts arising. As is the case in facilities enforcing custody pending deportation, these house rules should therefore be available in various languages based on the detainees’ most common countries of origin. Response: Information for those accommodated in the Reception Centre is available in Arabic, English, French and Tamil. It thus largely covers the languages spoken by those accommodated there. In addition, many asylum seekers themselves speak other languages (e.g. English). There is not enough space on the walls in the facility to hang up this information in all the languages which are spoken there. Also, things would get very confusing as a result. The information is of no significance for the asylum procedure but was merely designed as additional material to help refugees find their way around the facility. Experience shows that most refugees find their bearings when they first arrive in the facility by other means, for example by talking to staff, members of the church refugee support group and/ or others detainees. For the rest, an easily comprehensible general information sheet with pictures is handed out to each refugee on arrival. The Joint Commission then reiterated its stance, namely that the house rules should be available in several languages based on the most frequent countries of origin, as is standard practice in predeportation detention facilities, and should be handed to refugees where required. identified problems as regards whether a person was fit to get on an aeroplane, but this information was not passed on to the Federal Police, who then began the procedure for returning the persons in question regardless. It should be examined whether communication between the Land and the federal authorities can be improved. Response: In the Ministry’s opinion, communication between all the authorities based at the airport works very well. Identifying physical and mental illnesses and stress is the responsibility of the registered contract doctor (psychologist and psychiatrist), who is bound by medical confidentiality and takes this very seriously. If the doctor were to allow himself to be relieved of this professional secrecy and were to pass on information to other authorities to the disadvantage or to the advantage of those concerned (e.g. ability to travel in the case of planned forced returns), this would possibly violate the principles of data protection, which could, amongst other things, have criminal law consequences for the doctor. In such cases, in the opinion of the specialist departments in the Ministry, the competent lawyers would have to obtain comprehensive information about the health of their clients or, if necessary, take the necessary action. This example clearly shows that some demands made by the church social service come to nothing and that on occasion their suggestions indicate a lack of sound legal knowledge. The Joint Commission thereupon underlined the fact that information which is key when it comes to assessing whether someone is fit to get on an aeroplane should at any rate be handed to the Federal Police doctor who is accompanying the return flight. As described in the above, the Reception Centre is well-equipped. However, the head of the facility reported during the visit and the meeting with staff of the church-run social service also revealed that the facility cannot offer those accommodated there any supervised recreational activities. The documents sent to the Joint Commission after the visit likewise do not indicate that there are any courses or sports activities on offer. Especially when people with different cultural backgrounds are accommodated together it appears important, however, to actively encourage them to break up their daily routine. The facility should offer more courses at fixed times during the week, as otherwise there is a risk that those accommodated there will not take up the opportunities which are theoretically available and will lapse into mere ���safe-keeping”. Response: Various leisure-time activities are available in the facility and are taken up by the refugees (football pitch/basketball court, gym, film screenings, painting/arts and crafts, library, board games and games, children’s playground etc.). German lessons, occasional sports activities and other games on the sports field are indeed supervised. Often those accommodated in the Reception Centre themselves take Further suggestions for improving the conditions of detention Women and juveniles can lock the doors to their rooms. It is not apparent why this opportunity is denied the men. Response: For security reasons, lockable rooms are a great disadvantage in dangerous situations (e.g. suicidal tendencies, arson). That is why the rooms generally do not have locks. Unaccompanied, underage refugees – like women travelling alone – must be regarded as in need of particular protection. That is why they can lock the doors to their rooms by turning a knob. The security service can open these doors from the outside using a square-section key. Of course, this can lead to a loss of valuable time in an emergency. The need to protect minors and women was weighed up against practicability in an emergency. It is impossible to find the best possible solution to this problem in all respects. The staff of the church social service reported cases in which the medical and psychological examination 69