A/HRC/4/19/Add.4 page 19 44. According to civil society, particular areas of concern relate to the lengthy and often discretionary decision-making processes in the granting and revocations of stay, work and residence permits despite the introduction of the “One-Stop Shop”; the different standards applied at various courts of appeal in granting free legal aid; the lack of systematic translation of official documents for foreigners; and particularly the lack of suspensive effect of an appeal against an expulsion order before the judge of the peace. 45. Regarding the situation in CPTAs, concerns were expressed about the detention per se of asylum-seekers or irregular migrants, and in any case about the excessive period of “administrative detention” foreseen in the law, especially when the expulsion of foreigners is not immediately enforceable. Additionally, NGOs strongly criticized the existence of “multipurpose” centres, defined as reception centres though functioning as CPTAs, such as the centre in Cassibile. Particularly worrisome in this regard is the lack of clarity as to the applicable legislation directly affecting the migrants and asylum-seekers present in the centres. As to the management of the centres, a common concern was expressed regarding the lack of transparency and free access of lawyers, medical doctors and NGOs to the detriment of the quality of services and legal protection granted to immigrants and asylum-seekers.30 46. During his visit to the Women’s Centre of Ragusa, the Special Rapporteur received first-hand information about cases which, if confirmed, raised serious questions concerning the psychological and legal protection granted as well as information given to the women held there. A group of survivors, who had witnessed the death of 80 fellow immigrants in the course of their voyage, had not received any psychological counselling and were still traumatized. A woman at risk of deportation showed the Special Rapporteur her marriage certificate testifying to her marriage to an Italian and the documents stating that her son had been granted refugee status due to fear of persecution in their country of origin. In a separate incident widely covered by the media, a group of asylum-seekers and immigrants denounced mistreatment and discrimination in the centre at Caltanissetta (Sicily), where sub-Saharan Africans were subjected to discriminatory treatment by some of those working in the centre.31 It was also acknowledged, however, that the quality of the reception migrants received in the centres, particularly in Lampedusa, had improved, though it still depended on the number of persons arriving on a particular day. With a nominal capacity of 186 persons, only a week before the Special Rapporteur’s visit, the Lampedusa centre had received 600 migrants. While there is a project to enlarge the centre, NGOs voiced scepticism about its actual implementation as the enlargement has been pending for years. 30 Under the legislation in force (DPR 303/2004), the Prefect (head of the Government Territorial Office) entrusts the running of the centre to local, public or private authorities operating in the field of social work or assistance to asylum-seekers or migrants. 31 Reportedly, unlike North Africans and migrants and asylum-seekers from other continents, sub-Saharan Africans were required to pay in cash for services that should be provided for free according to established rules and norms, such as food and telephone cards, and had to wait in line to receive medical treatment.