E/CN.4/2003/85 page 13 38. According to the information received by the Special Rapporteur, only the legislation of a limited number of countries provides for an automatic review of detention at set intervals to determine whether it should continue.14 In the majority of cases the review is not undertaken automatically, but mechanisms exist that allow the migrant to request it. However, access to such mechanisms can be seriously undermined by the lack of procedural safeguards. Application of non-custodial measures 39. The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention recommended that “alternative and non-custodial measures, such as reporting requirements, should always be considered before resorting to detention”.15 Similarly, in its resolution 2000/21, the Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights encouraged “States to adopt alternatives to detention such as those enumerated in the Guidelines on the Applicable Criteria and Standards relating to the Detention of Asylum Seekers” (para. 6). The legislation of several countries provides for alternatives to administrative detention, such as release on bail, release on parole, home detention, semi-liberty, payment of a certain sum as guarantee, police supervision, ban on leaving the country, obligation to reside at a given address with periodic reporting to the authorities, withdrawal of passport. 40. Reportedly, there is an element of discretion in many countries as to when such measures can be granted, as often the law itself does not prescribe them in the presence of specific criteria. Often, in the absence of statistics it is not possible to assess how often alternative measures are granted. However, it was reported that even when the laws provides expressly for non-custodial measures, they are hardly accessible. Bail, when granted, is usually set at a sum not affordable by migrants. The request for sureties is a further obstacle given the absence of relatives or friends who can stand surety for migrants. Similarly, home detention or social work is hard to obtain due to the fact that migrants often do not have stable work and lodgings. Detention of victims of trafficking and smuggling 41. Victims of trafficking and smuggling commit infractions or offences, such as irregular entry, use of false documents and other violations of immigration laws and regulations, which make them liable to detention.16 The law of some countries punishes as criminal offences or administrative infractions irregular entry, entry without valid documents or engaging in prostitution, including forced prostitution. Victims of trafficking are thus often detained and deported without regard for their victimization and without consideration for the risks they may be exposed to if returned to their country of origin. 42. The victims’ needs for specific medical, psychological or legal assistance are often not taken into account.17 The Special Rapporteur received information and testimonies of women and children who had been held in slavery-like conditions and who had suffered physical and sexual abuse and who were arrested and detained as irregular migrants after managing to escape from their exploiters, suffering further traumas. Furthermore, the Special Rapporteur received information according to which, for fear of being deported or criminalized, often victims of trafficking do not denounce their traffickers and do not seek protection from local authorities against their abusers.