CAT/C/57/D/531/2012
1.
The author of the complaint, dated 14 August 2012, is L.A., an Algerian national
born on 30 January 1970, married with three children. He was an investigating judge from
1990 until 2011. He alleges that he is the victim of a violation by Algeria of the Convention,
without, however, invoking any articles of the Convention other than article 22. He is not
represented by counsel.
The facts as submitted by the complainant
2.1
The complainant was an investigating judge from 1990 until 2011: from 1990 to
1993, at Blida Military Court; from 1993 to 2010, at the civilian courts in Bouira, Médéa
and Batna; and subsequently at Guelma Court.
2.2
The complainant emphasizes that the work of investigating judges is extremely
sensitive in Algeria, and very difficult when their investigations concern high-ranking
individuals or politicians. In the course of his work, he was exposed to attacks and threats
each time he investigated such individuals or persons implicated in terrorism cases, and it
was for this reason that his wife and daughter had to leave Algeria temporarily in 2007, as
their security could no longer be guaranteed.
2.3
At the beginning of 2007, the complainant found a bomb inside a closet situated in
front of the door to his apartment. On discovering the bomb, he immediately called the
special counter-terrorism squad, which defused it. It turned out to be not an improvised
device, but a Russian-made bomb, suggesting that it was not the work of a terrorist group.
According to the complainant, only persons close to the army could possess a bomb of that
type. He adds that this episode was linked to an investigation he was conducting into a drug
trafficking case in which the son of the then Minister of Justice was implicated. The bomb
was intended as a warning to the complainant not to pursue his investigation. The
authorities, however, categorized the case as an act of terrorism.
2.4
Some time before this incident, a colleague of the complainant’s, the investigating
judge Chabora Abdel Majid, had had his throat cut while investigating a drug trafficking
case. Although he was worried, the complainant continued his work, but acting more
carefully, moving house regularly and ensuring his wife’s and youngest daughter’s safety
by arranging for them to leave for France.
2.5
On 5 August 2008, the complainant began an investigation into a major
embezzlement case, having obtained the agreement of the public prosecutor. When the
investigation was completed, 28 citizens were charged. Most were ordinary people, with the
exception of three individuals, namely, the Wali (governor) of Souk Ahras wilaya, the
General Secretary of the wilaya and the Director of Administrative Services, all three of
whom were suspected of having embezzled 200 million dinars each and losing more than 7
billion dinars. In the course of the investigation, the complainant summoned all of the
accused for questioning, but he was unable to question the three aforementioned individuals.
He met with a categorical refusal from his superiors, in particular the Chief Prosecutor and
the President of the Court and from his superior, the Inspector General of the Ministry of
Justice, who on numerous occasions firmly vetoed the summonses.
2.6
Through his inquiries, the complainant succeeded in locating the money embezzled
by the Wali of Souk Ahras, which had been deposited in an account at the local
development bank. On 26 January 2009, the complainant obtained written authorization
from the bank to seize the amount in question. Following the seizure, the complainant
received threats and was physically assaulted several times by unknown persons. In April
2009, as he was returning home from work, the complainant was approaching his building
when he noticed three armed men about 50 metres away from him. They opened fire on
him, injuring his right leg, as a result of which he had to spend nine days in hospital. The
complainant adds that, as she was leaving school, his 7-year-old daughter was threatened by
2
GE.16-13805