Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
Visit to Switzerland undertaken from 27 January to 7 February 2019: recommendations and observations addressed to the national preventive mechanism
Report of the Subcommittee * , **
II.National preventive mechanism4
III.Concerns and recommendations addressed to the national preventive mechanism5
A.Recommendations relating to legal, institutional and structural issues5
B.Recommendations on visit methodology8
I.Liste des interlocuteurs du Sous-Comité11
II.Liste des lieux de privation de liberté visités par le Sous-Comité13
III.Liste des lieux de privation de liberté visités conjointement par le Sous-Comité et le mécanisme national de prévention14
1.In accordance with its mandate under the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture carried out its first visit to Switzerland from 27 January to 7 February 2019. Switzerland ratified the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment on 2 December 1986, and the Optional Protocol on 24 September 2009.
2.The Subcommittee members conducting the visit were: Catherine Paulet (head of delegation), Satyabhooshun Gupt Domah, Gnambi Garba Kodjo, Petros Michaelides, Abdallah Ounnir and Haimoud Ramdan. The Subcommittee was assisted by three Human Rights Officers from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and four interpreters.
3.The principal objectives of the visit were:
(a)to visit a range of places of deprivation of liberty in order to assist the State party in fully implementing its obligations under the Optional Protocol, particularly the obligation to strengthen the protection of persons deprived of their liberty from the risk of torture and ill-treatment; and
(b)to provide advice and technical assistance to the national preventive mechanism of Switzerland, namely, the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture, and to consider the extent to which the national and cantonal authorities are supporting its work and responding to its recommendations, taking account of the Subcommittee’s guidelines on national preventive mechanisms (CAT/OP/12/5).
4.The Subcommittee held meetings with those persons listed in annex I and visited the places of deprivation of liberty listed in annex II, interviewing persons deprived of their liberty, law enforcement and detention officers, medical personnel and others. Meetings were held with members of the national preventive mechanism, which permitted the Subcommittee to examine the mechanism’s mandate and working methods and to consider how best to improve its effectiveness. In order to better understand how the national preventive mechanism works in practice, the Subcommittee’s delegation also visited, together with members of the mechanism, a place of deprivation of liberty chosen by the latter (see annex III). That visit was led by a representative of the national preventive mechanism, with the members of the Subcommittee as observers.
5.At the end of the visit, the delegation presented its confidential preliminary observations orally to government authorities and officials and the national preventive mechanism.
6.In the present report, the Subcommittee addresses to the national preventive mechanism its observations and recommendations relevant to the prevention of torture and ill-treatment of persons deprived of their liberty in Switzerland.
7.The Subcommittee reserves the right to make further comments, whether or not these are mentioned in the present report, in its discussions with the national preventive mechanism arising from the report. The absence of any comment in the present report relating to a facility or place of deprivation of liberty visited by the Subcommittee does not imply that it has a positive or negative opinion of it.
8.The Subcommittee recommends that the present report be distributed to all relevant authorities, departments and institutions, including but not limited to those to which it specifically refers.
9.The present report will remain confidential until such time as the national preventive mechanism decides to make it public in accordance with article 16 (2) of the Optional Protocol. The Subcommittee believes that the publication of the present report would contribute to the prevention of torture and ill-treatment in Switzerland.
10.The Subcommittee recommends that the national preventive mechanism request the publication of the present report in accordance with article 16 (2) of the Optional Protocol.
11.The Subcommittee draws the attention of the national preventive mechanism to the Special Fund established under article 26 of the Optional Protocol to the Convention. Only recommendations contained in those Subcommittee visit reports that have been made public can form the basis of applications to the Fund, in accordance with its published criteria.
12.The Subcommittee wishes to express its gratitude to the Swiss authorities and to the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture for their help and assistance relating to the planning and undertaking of the visit, in particular Sandra Imhof, the point of contact within the Commission for the Subcommittee’s visit.
II.National preventive mechanism
13.Federal Act No. 150.1 of 20 March 2009 on the Commission for the Prevention of Torture, which entered into force on 1 January 2010, established the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture, designated it the national preventive mechanism for Switzerland and gave it jurisdiction over the entire territory of the State party.
14.The members of the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture are nominated by the Federal Department of Justice and Police and the Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, and appointed by the Federal Council. Non-governmental organizations can propose candidates to the federal departments in question. The Commission was established as a body with administrative links to the Federal Department of Justice and Police.
15.The National Commission for the Prevention of Torture is composed of 12 members, who are experts in fields related to deprivation of liberty, human rights and medicine, including psychiatry. They work part-time and are unpaid. Members of the Commission serve for a four-year term, renewable twice. The Commission has a permanent secretariat consisting of a full-time secretary, four part-time staff and an intern. Taken together, these equate to 3.7 full-time positions.
16.In addition, the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture has a team of nine observers who are responsible for the regular monitoring of forced repatriations by air, including airport transfers carried out by the police under the country’s law on foreign nationals.
17.In accordance with the law, the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture regularly examines the situation of persons deprived of their liberty, visits the places where such persons are or may be found and makes recommendations to the competent authorities with the aim of improving the treatment and situation of such persons and preventing torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The Commission also submits proposals and comments on relevant existing laws and bills, including Federal Act No. 150.1.
18.The National Commission for the Prevention of Torture issues reports and makes recommendations to the federal and cantonal authorities after each visit. The recommendations contained in its reports are also examined by the relevant departments, including the Federal Department of Justice and Police. According to the Commission, its recommendations are generally well received by the authorities, and the majority of them are put into effect.
III.Concerns and recommendations addressed to the national preventive mechanism
A.Recommendations relating to legal, institutional and structural issues
Structure and independence
19.From a structural point of view, the Subcommittee notes that the institutional identity of the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture is not distinct from that of the Federal Department of Justice and Police. This hinders recognition of the Commission as an independent entity in the field of torture prevention.
20.Although mechanisms that are compliant with the Optional Protocol can take a range of forms, the mechanism must nevertheless be structured in such a manner that it can carry out its mandate in accordance with the principles set forth in the Optional Protocol, the Subcommittee’s guidelines on national preventive mechanisms (CAT/OP/12/5) and the compilation of advice provided by the Subcommittee in response to requests from national preventive mechanisms, annexed to its ninth annual report (CAT/C/57/4).
21.Experience has shown that a national preventive mechanism can exercise its mandate more effectively if it is fully independent, and if that independence is realized and reflected in its structure, status, operation and staffing.
22.The budget of the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture is subsumed within that of the General Secretariat of the Federal Department of Justice and Police. The Commission does not appear to be autonomous, as the General Secretariat controls its budget. With an overall yearly budget of 960,600 Swiss francs, the Commission has only limited flexibility with regard to its operating expenses, which obliges it to strictly prioritize expenditure, thereby limiting its ability to effectively perform its tasks.
23.The administrative status of the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture was assessed in the legal opinion drafted by Walter Kälin and Manfred Nowak, who found that the Commission was not a legally independent administrative unit and that it had no legal personality. The opinion also states that, because the General Secretariat of the Federal Department of Justice and Police exercises administrative oversight over the Commission, the criteria for the independence of the national preventive mechanism set out in article 18 (1) of the Optional Protocol are not met.
24.The legal opinion is based on a legal interpretation of the operational independence of national preventive mechanisms within the meaning of article 18 (1) of the Optional Protocol and in the light of international law, the practice of the Subcommittee and the principles relating to the status of national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights (the Paris Principles).
25. The Subcommittee welcomes the willingness shown by the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture, in its dialogue with the State party, to sever its administrative and budgetary links with the Federal Department of Justice and Police so that it can operate independently and carry out activities and functions that are formally separate from those of that federal entity. This will be made possible by the Commission ’ s having its own structure, status, staff and budget.
26.The Federal Council dispatch regarding Federal Act No. 150.1, which established the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture, states that the Commission is expected to carry out between 20 and 30 visits to places of deprivation of liberty a year.
27.In Switzerland, the cantons are responsible for the enforcement of sentences, and each of the 26 cantons has one or more places of deprivation of liberty. The documents provided to the Subcommittee by the Federal Government prior to the visit indicate that there are more than 400 places of deprivation of liberty throughout the country, including police stations, prisons, centres for asylum seekers, psychiatric hospitals, educational and correctional facilities for minors and young adults, and federal military establishments.
28.Nevertheless, according to information provided by the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture, there are in fact close to 700 places of deprivation of liberty in total when all places meeting the criteria set forth in article 4 of the Optional Protocol are included – that is, in addition to the country’s approximately 100 penitentiary and detention facilities. At the current average rate of 15 visits per year, it is not possible to conduct sufficiently regular visits to each place of deprivation of liberty in the State party, with the result that the effectiveness of the national preventive mechanism is diminished, bearing in mind the mandate set out in article 19 of the Optional Protocol, namely, to regularly examine the situation of persons deprived of their liberty in places of detention as defined in article 4 of the Optional Protocol.
29.The Subcommittee is concerned about the lack of financial resources allocated to the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture, which constitutes a major obstacle to its effective and efficient operation, as demonstrated by the low number of visits conducted in relation to the number of places of deprivation of liberty.
30.In its report to the State party, the Subcommittee highlighted the chronic shortage of resources and stressed that the State party must provide the national preventive mechanism with sufficient financial resources to create the preconditions necessary for its effective operation and to enable it to fulfil its obligations under the Optional Protocol.
31. The Subcommittee recommends that the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture provide the State party with a budget forecast that is sufficient to enable it to carry out its mandate, in terms of visiting an adequate number of places of deprivation of liberty and also in terms of being able to enlist, as needed, the services of external experts, interpreters working into various languages and other persons or services that would enable it to carry out its mandate.
32. The Subcommittee also recommends that the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture stress to the State party the need to increase the Commission ’ s financial resources, describing in a transparent and concrete manner the tasks that have not been accomplished and the work that could be completed if its resources were increased.
Members of the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture
33.The Subcommittee is concerned that the 12 members of the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture perform their duties on a part-time basis and without remuneration, even though this work falls under the State party’s tradition of part-time public service (milice), which is an integral part of the custom of participation that is practised in a range of fields, including the political and social spheres.
34.The Subcommittee noted that, despite the commendable efforts of the members of the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture and their commitment to preventing torture, there is a de facto limit on their availability, which hampers their ability to carry out their mandate properly, particularly with regard to the number, duration and regularity of visits.
35. The Subcommittee recommends that the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture invite the State party to review the working conditions of the Commission ’ s members to enable them to devote themselves fully to its activities, including by making it possible for some of them to work full-time and by allocating the financial resources necessary for their remuneration.
Human resources: secretariat of the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture
36.The human resources of the permanent secretariat of the national preventive mechanism equate to just 3.7 full-time posts, with the only full-time post being that of Secretary. This places a de facto limit on the time spent on activities such as the preparation of and follow-up to visits, the drafting of visit and thematic reports, training and prevention activities, and dialogue and awareness-raising among stakeholders.
37.In addition, the staff of the secretariat of the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture are part of the Federal Department of Justice and Police and, as such, are appointed by the Civil Service Commission and are subject to the general rules on the mobility of public officials. However, in order to guarantee its operational independence, the national preventive mechanism must have full control over the management of its staff.
38.The fact that the staff of the secretariat of the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture are not exclusively attached to it, and that the members responsible for carrying out its mandate must also perform other tasks not related to the Commission, makes it more difficult for it to adopt an effective operational strategy.
39. The Subcommittee recommends that the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture invite the State party to significantly increase the staff of the secretariat and to ensure that they are permanent and work directly for the Commission, rather than for the Federal Department of Justice and Police. The Subcommittee also recommends that the Commission identify its needs and articulate them directly to the federal authorities so that the best way to address them can be determined, in keeping with the mandate set out in the Optional Protocol.
Strengthening the national preventive mechanism
40.The Subcommittee considers that, despite the inadequacy of the human and financial resources allocated to it and the questions surrounding its independence from other federal institutions, the work of the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture is carried out with great professionalism and expertise.
41. The Subcommittee is of the view that a significant increase in financial and human resources, for members and for the secretariat, would enable the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture to operate optimally, with an improved operational strategy and greater capacity and efficiency with regard to conducting visits, making recommendations to the competent authorities and submitting proposals and comments on relevant legislation, in line with the provisions of article 19 of the Optional Protocol. Increased resources could also enable the Commission to strengthen its international cooperation with other mechanisms, which could, in turn, strengthen torture prevention worldwide.
42. The Subcommittee is of the view that the conclusions reached in the legal opinion drafted by Walter Kälin and Manfred Nowak can serve as a basis for action by the authorities and the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture to realize the latter ’ s independence, in accordance with the Optional Protocol, particularly article 18, and to strengthen its operational capacity, which will ensure that it is better able to discharge its responsibilities effectively.
43.The Subcommittee noted that most of the government officials who met with the delegation were aware of the existence and role of the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture. It also found this to be the case among relevant stakeholders, including members of civil society and the general public, as well as persons deprived of their liberty. The Commission enjoys good visibility, and its role and the nature of its work are well known.
44.However, the Subcommittee emphasizes that the fact that the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture cannot be fully considered an independent authority likely tarnishes its image somewhat and, by extension, undermines its ability to fully and effectively carry out its preventive mandate.
45. The Subcommittee recommends that the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture urge the Federal Government and other stakeholders to ensure that the independence of the Commission is both recognized and realized, and that this serves to enhance its visibility and its ability to carry out its mandate.
46. To the same end, the Subcommittee encourages the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture to conduct public awareness campaigns and to undertake, in cooperation with a wide range of stakeholders, promotional activities focusing on its mandate and its work in places of deprivation of liberty for the benefit of the competent public authorities, including the cantons, civil society, lawyers, judges and other legal professionals.
B.Recommendations on visit methodology
Preparation and aims of visits
47.The Subcommittee accompanied the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture as it engaged in its substantive work of protecting persons deprived of their liberty, specifically during an announced visit to a place of deprivation of liberty, namely, Bern regional prison. As the Commission had already visited the facility four years earlier, the purpose of this joint visit was to verify whether the recommendations made had been implemented. For logistical reasons, only three members of the delegation accompanied the Commission.
48. While acknowledging that, owing to its limited human resources, it is difficult for the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture to have an effective overall strategy and a workplan, the Subcommittee recommends that the Commission develop a strategy focusing on unannounced visits and more frequent follow-up visits that will enable it to assess the implementation of its recommendations within a shorter time frame.
Conduct of the visit
Presentation of the national preventive mechanism
49.The Subcommittee observed that the prison authorities had a good knowledge of the mandate of the national preventive mechanism, which was clearly identified as the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture in Switzerland. The Subcommittee notes with satisfaction that the Commission presented its mandate in a clear and informative manner.
50.The delegation observed that the interviews were conducted in accordance with the applicable rules, with care and sensitivity.
51.On occasion, however, it noted that the requisite information on the confidentiality of the interview or on the mandate of the national preventive mechanism was not communicated.
52. While the Subcommittee recognizes that the members of the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture conduct themselves in a very professional manner, it nevertheless recommends that they introduce themselves to interviewees by stating their name and function, that they explain the mechanism ’ s mandate and that they reinforce the latter ’ s preventive aspect. The explicit and informed consent of interviewees should always be obtained; it should also be made clear that the interview is confidential, voluntary and can be interrupted at any time at the interviewee ’ s request. The Subcommittee is of the view that introducing themselves properly will help Commission members conducting visits and interviews build trust with the interviewee and facilitate communication and information-sharing.
53. The Subcommittee also recommends that the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture choose carefully the location of individual interviews to ensure that their content remains confidential.
54. The members of the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture should also inform interviewees that they can report any reprisals taken against them following the visit, and encourage them to do so. If necessary, specific follow-up visits should be conducted.
55. The Subcommittee recommends that the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture prepare a brochure describing its mandate and working methods, explaining the concept of informed consent and providing contact information, and that it disseminate the brochure as widely as possible.
56.The Subcommittee noted that the members of the national preventive mechanism were not wearing anything by which they could be readily identified.
57. The Subcommittee recommends that, when conducting visits, members of the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture wear something to identify themselves, such as a badge or vest.
58.In view of the high percentage of persons deprived of their liberty who are of foreign origin, it is essential that the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture have the means to speak to any detainee in a language that he or she understands.
59. The Subcommittee recommends that the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture take appropriate measures to ensure that a sufficient number of interpreters are available. The Subcommittee also recommends that the Commission make promotional materials on its mandate available in languages other than the official languages of Switzerland.
60.The Subcommittee underlines the need to ensure that interviewees are protected from possible reprisals, even when there appears to be little risk. The delegation noted with satisfaction that, during the debriefing, the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture made it plain to the prison authorities that any form of intimidation or reprisals against persons deprived of their liberty constituted a violation of the State party’s obligation under article 13 of the Convention and article 21 of the Optional Protocol.
61. The Subcommittee encourages the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture to continue its dialogue with the authorities on the unacceptability of reprisals and on its related follow-up work. The Commission should also undertake preventive follow-up visits if necessary.
Follow-up discussion after the visit
62.The Subcommittee’s delegation attended the follow-up discussion between the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture and the authorities of Bern regional prison. The delegation found that the time allotted to the discussion was insufficient to cover all the issues that needed to be addressed, given that four years had passed since the previous visit to Bern regional prison.
63. The Subcommittee encourages the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture to devote the necessary time to follow-up discussions with the authorities of the facilities visited.
64.The Subcommittee notes with satisfaction that visit reports are prepared and that there is a clear policy regarding the systematic transmittal of these reports, and the recommendations that they contain, to the authorities of the facilities visited and the relevant federal departments, and regarding their systematic publication.
65. The Subcommittee encourages the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture to continue to publish, after each visit, a report in which it expresses its concerns and makes recommendations (see CAT/OP/12/5, paras. 36 and 37). After having transmitted the report, the Commission should systematically monitor the implementation of the recommendations and use the report as a basis for regular dialogue with the management of the facilities visited and the competent authorities.
66. The Subcommittee requests that a reply to the present report be provided within six months from the date of its transmittal to the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture. The reply should respond directly to all the recommendations and requests for further information made in the present report, giving a full account of action that has already been taken or is planned (including timescales) in order to implement the recommendations. It should include details concerning the implementation of institution-specific recommendations and concerning general policy and practice.
67. Article 15 of the Optional Protocol prohibits all forms of sanction or reprisal, from all sources, against anyone who has been in contact with the Subcommittee. The Subcommittee reminds the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture of its obligation to help ensure that no such sanctions or reprisals take place and requests that it provide in its reply information concerning the steps that it has taken in this connection.
68. The Subcommittee considers both its visit and the present report to form part of an ongoing process of dialogue. The Subcommittee looks forward to assisting the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture in fulfilling its obligations under the Optional Protocol by providing further advice and technical assistance, in order to achieve the common goal of preventing torture and ill-treatment in places of deprivation of liberty. The Subcommittee believes that the most efficient and effective way of developing the dialogue would be for it to meet with the Commission within six months of its having received the reply to the present report.
69. The Subcommittee recommends that, in accordance with article 12 (d) of the Optional Protocol, the National Commission for the Prevention of Torture enter into dialogue with it on the implementation of its recommendations, within six months of the Subcommittee ’ s having received the reply to the present report. The Subcommittee also recommends that the Commission initiate discussions with it on the arrangements for such a dialogue at the time of submission of its reply to the present report.
Liste des interlocuteurs du Sous-Comité
Office fédéral de la justice (Département fédéral de la justice et la police) :
Bernardo Stadelmann, sous-directeur de l’OFJ et chef du domaine de direction Droit pénal
Ronald Gramigna, chef de l’unité Exécution des peines et des mesures
Béatrice Kalbermatter, cheffe suppléante de l’unité Exécution des peines et des mesures, responsable du domaine des mineurs
Aimée Zermatten, unité Exécution des peines et des mesures
Alain Chablais, chef de l’unité Protection internationale des droits de l’homme et Agent du Gouvernement suisse (Représentation de la Suisse devant la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme et le Comité contre la torture)
Folco Galli, Chef de l’information
Florian Mauron, stagiaire scientifique
Secrétariat d’Etat aux migrations (Département fédéral de la justice et la police) :
Beat Perler, Chef unité Bases du retour et aide au retour
Direction politique (Département fédéral des affaires étrangères) :
Sandra Lendenmann, cheffe de la section Politique des droits de l’homme, Division Sécurité humaine DSH
Conférence des directrices et directeurs des départements cantonaux de justice et police (CCDJP) :
Alain Hofer, secrétaire général adjoint de la CCDJP
Fredy Fässler, Conseiller d’Etat du canton de St-Gall, Chef du Département de la sécurité et de la justice, membre du comité de la CCDJP et Président du conseil de fondation CSCSP
Claudio Stricker, collaborateur scientifique, Secrétariat général de la CCDJP
Centre suisse de compétence en matière d’exécution des sanctions pénales (CSCSP) :
Patrick Cotti, directeur du CSCSP
Blaise Péquignot, membre du conseil de fondation du Centre suisse de compétences en matière d’exécution des sanctions pénales (CSCSP) et secrétaire général de la Conférence latine des chefs des départements de justice et police (CLDJP)
Conférence des commandants des polices cantonales :
Vladimir Novotny, secrétaire général
Ministère public de la Confédération :
Michael Lauber, Procureur général de la Confédération
Julie Noto, responsable section terrorisme
B.Commission nationale de prévention de la torture (CNPT)
Alberto Achermann, président
Sandra Imhof, cheffe du Secrétariat
Roger Staub, Fondation Pro Mente Sana
Kathi Hermann, Fondation Pro Mente Sana
Valentina Darbellay, Terre des Hommes
Sarah Frehner, Organisation Suisse d’aide aux réfugiés
Muriel Trummer, Amnesty International
Dominique Joris, ACAT-Suisse
Manuela Ernst, Croix Rouge Suisse
Liste des lieux de privation de liberté visités par le Sous-Comité
Canton de Berne
Polizeiwache Waisenhaus (commissariat de police)
Polizeiwache Bahnhof Bern (poste de police de la gare)
Canton de Zürich
Flughafengefängnis Zürich (prison d’aéroport de Zürich, les deux sections)
Justizvollzugsanstalt Pöschwies (prison de Pöschwies)
Gefängnis Zürich (prison à Zürich)
Psychiatrische Universitätsklinik Zürich (clinique psychiatrique)
Kantonal Polizeigefängnis (police cantonale)
Canton de Genève
Etablissement fermé de Favra
Etablissement concordataire de Frambois
10.Police de la sécurité internationale (PSI) (à l’aéroport)
PSI-SARA [service asile – rapatriement] (à l’aéroport)
Centre de transit aéroportuaire Genève « aile nord » (centre pour requérants d’asile)
Hôtel de Police (Boulevard Carl-Vogt)
Poste de Police, gare Cornavin
Poste de police cantonale des Pâquis
Canton de Vaud
Hôtel de Police de Lausanne
Centre de la Blécherette, Police cantonale (zone carcérale)
Etablissements de la Plaine de l’Orbe (E.P.O.), prison de Bochuz
Liste des lieux de privation de liberté visités conjointement par le Sous-Comité et le mécanisme national de prévention
Regionalgefängnis Bern (prison régionale de Berne)