Facts
On 1 February 1995, the Federal Act on Coercive Measures in the Field of Foreign Nationals (RSFNA) entered into force. It amended the provisions relating to the enforcement of measures under the law on foreign nationals provided for in the Federal Act on the Residence and Establishment of Foreign Nationals (LSEE). Henceforth, a foreign national without a residence or settlement permit may be placed in pre-trial detention for a maximum of three months (Art. 13a LSEE) and detention pending deportation may last up to nine months (Art. 13b LSEE). On 5 April 1995, the State Council of the canton of Zurich amended various provisions of the Ordinance on Cantonal Police Prisons (PVO), expressly declaring that this Ordinance also applies to persons in pre-trial detention and detention pending deportation (§ 1 para. 1 let. c PVO). Three foreign nationals appealed against these amendments to the FSCA, contesting in particular the provisions relating to walks (§ 33 PVO), visits (§§ 38 and 39 PVO), correspondence (§ 41 PVO) and work (§ 27 para. 1 PVO).Considerations
1. The FSCA acknowledges that the appellants have standing, as they risk with minimal probability being placed in administrative detention under the law on foreign nationals, which could result in the application of the contested Ordinance. 2. In the matter of administrative detention of foreign nationals, the FSCA has specified the minimum requirements of federal law concerning detention conditions, based in particular on the case law on restrictions on the fundamental rights of other categories of detainees and on European and international rules on the treatment of detainees. Thus, restrictions on the freedom of detainees must not go beyond what is necessary to ensure the purpose of detention and the proper functioning of the institution. The detention regime for foreign nationals must be distinguished from that of remand prisoners and convicts, in particular with regard to the level of security and accommodation. Administrative detainees must in principle benefit from a more liberal regime, with the possibility of having contacts with the outside world and among themselves. 3. Within this framework, the FSCA examines the conformity of the contested cantonal provisions with the Constitution. 4. With regard to the walk (§ 33 PVO), the FSCA considers that the Zurich regulation, which only provides for half an hour of daily walk from the fourth day, does not meet the minimum requirements for the administrative detention of foreign nationals. A minimum of one hour of daily walk must be guaranteed from the beginning of the detention. 5. Regarding visits (§§ 38 and 39 PVO), the FSCA accepts that the requirement of authorisation for visits and their supervision are in conformity with the Constitution, insofar as they are justified by organisational or security considerations.…