Judgment No CCZ 4/14 6 Const. Application No SC 207/11 While the location of the toilet within the holding cell was admitted, it was denied that the applicants had to wade through urine. The reason given for the denial was that, if that had happened, the applicants would have contracted a disease of some sort. They maintained that there is running water at the police station and denied that there was human excreta flowing into the holding cell from the toilet. They averred, further, that it is standard procedure that a police detail is placed on guard duty at the cells to deal with detained persons’ requests. Where no member is placed on guard duty all suspects are to be visited at least every half hour. Such visits are recorded in the charge office diary or report book maintained for this purpose. [However neither the diary nor the report book was attached to the opposing affidavit.] They maintained that although no toilet paper is kept in the cells, it is issued upon request. While it was admitted that no sanitary provisions are made for menstruating women, the women are permitted to bring their sanitary requirements. They added that these concerns are being addressed by a committee set up by Cabinet to look into the conditions of police and prison cells, which committee is expected to make recommendations on how best to improve the detention conditions of suspects and convicted persons. It was denied that the blankets given to the applicants were dirty although, by virtue of the number of detainees in the cells, they could have been inadequate. According to police standards, so they averred, prisoners are to be supplied with good drinking water and sufficient wholesome food. The inadequacy of these provisions is also one of the matters being looked into by the committee.