The analysis focuses on the different origins of each set of standards and the different methods by which they are applied. The discussion notes that the ACA standards have largely been practitioner driven. Thus, they represent at bottom a defensive device used by the burgeoning North American penal-industrial complex and are voluntarily. The defense is against prisoner litigation; thus, the ACA standards have followed where the courts have been prepared to lead. In contrast, the CPT is explicitly a human rights-enhancing mechanism; the CPT standards have the explicit aim of enhancing human rights. Nevertheless, the two sets of standards are similar in other ways. They are both dynamic rather than static codes. They both rest on inspection processes that are acutely sensitive to the day-to-day realities of practical operations. Moreover, they have both achieved a high degree of credibility with practitioners and the judiciary alike. Thus, the detail included in both sets of standards has major advantages. Note, list of cases cited, and 42 references