CAT/C/48/D/453/2011
hours.1 He was then placed in a white van without police markings. With his hands
handcuffed behind his back, he was taken by the police to Arkaute central police station.
2.3
It was determined at the police station that the charges against the complainant fell
within the scope of anti-terrorism laws and that he should therefore be held
incommunicado, thereby depriving the complainant of contact with family members, a
lawyer or a doctor trusted by the detainee. The complainant asserts that the charges,
although related only to the destruction of public property with home-made inflammable
substances and, therefore, bearing no direct relation with the activities of armed groups, are
deemed to fall within the scope of anti-terrorism laws because they are politically
motivated, which in turn leads automatically to placement in incommunicado detention.
Counsel for the complainant appearing before the judge requested the application of the socalled “Garzón Protocol”, a series of measures designed to prevent ill-treatment or torture,
such as by permitting access to a doctor trusted by the detainee, informing family members
of the detainee’s condition and whereabouts and allowing the detainee to confer with a
lawyer in private. The complainant alleges that the request was denied.
2.4
The author was subjected to ill-treatment in Arkaute police station. He was obliged
to remain in uncomfortable positions to the point of exhaustion. He was kept in a cell
measuring 4 by 2 metres, with no windows and no furniture other than a cement bed.
Whenever the police called at the door or entered the cell, they forced him to stand against
the wall in uncomfortable positions and with his eyes closed. He received blows to all parts
of his body and was kicked in the genitals. They would sit him down, cover his head with
clothes and beat him senseless. He was prevented from sleeping by the loud music being
played and lights being kept on constantly. Moreover, when he was taken to the
interrogation room, he had to lower his head and keep his eyes shut; otherwise they would
bang him against the corridor wall. The same kind of treatment was also meted out during
questioning. Whenever he fell over or lost consciousness, he was forced to drink water,
even when he resisted. He was also subjected to psychological torture, being threatened
with death and told that his family would be harmed. He heard the cries of detainees in
neighbouring cells and was told that his brother had also been detained and was receiving
the same treatment because of him. All of this, in addition to being held incommunicado for
three days, left him in a serious state of anxiety.2
2.5
On 25 October 2002, the day following his detention in Arkaute police station, the
complainant was examined by a forensic doctor, to whom he reported the ill-treatment to
which he was being subjected. The doctor merely made a written note of the information,
without examining the complainant closely or showing concern for his condition. On 26
October 2002, the complainant again told the doctor that he was being tortured, but the
doctor made no mention of it in his report.3
1
2
3
GE.12-43762
The Committee notes that, according to a written statement submitted by the complainant to the
Donostia-San Sebastián police court on 29 January 2003, a court registrar appeared during the police
operation, showed him a warrant for his arrest and informed him that he would be charged with the
offence of terrorism. Subsequently, the house search began.
The application for constitutional amparo submitted by the complainant to the Constitutional Court
on 22 April 2004 states that he was also threatened with sexual assault.
In his written statement of 29 January 2003 to the Donostia-San Sebastián police court, the
complainant recounts: “I was twice taken to see the forensic doctor, the first time because of back
pain and the second because of a knee injury [...]. They told me that they would take me to hospital
but that did not happen. I was hoping that they would hurt me badly enough for me to be transferred
to hospital and left in peace for a while. But they had everything worked out and knew just how,
when and what to do at any given time. Even so, I realized on some occasions that they were worried
about the state I was in. On the other hand, in a written statement submitted to the Second Examining
3