CCPR/C/130/D/2429/2014
2.9
On 6 June 2007, the author’s lawyer submitted another complaint to the Aksiy district
prosecutor detailing the torture that the author had suffered at the hands of the police.
Together with the complaint, the lawyer submitted the results of the author’s medical
examination, an affidavit signed by the author’s cellmate who had witnessed his suffering
and copies of the notes that the author had been able to send to his brother from detention.
The lawyer submitted another complaint to the Aksiy district prosecutor on 7 June 2007. On
15 June 2007, the Aksiy assistant district prosecutor refused to open a criminal investigation
because there was no evidence that the injuries had been caused by the police and the author
himself had previously denied having been tortured. The refusal was based on the author’s
own testimony given on 27 April 2007 and the explanations given by three of the four police
officers whom the author had accused of having tortured him.
2.10 On 12 June 2007, following the author’s appeal, the Aksiy district court released the
author from pretrial detention. However, half an hour later, under pressure from victims of
the alleged crimes, the judge revoked his own decision and ordered the author to be placed
in pretrial detention. On 13 June 2007, the author’s lawyer appealed the decision of the Aksiy
district court and complained about the actions of the judge to the Chair of the Jalalabad
regional court. On 14 June 2007, the author was transferred to the Aksiy district hospital for
treatment. On 25 June 2007, the author was released from hospital pending trial.
2.11 On 31 July 2007, the Aksiy district court found the author guilty of one count of cattle
theft and fined him.
2.12 On 9 August 2007, the author appealed, to the Aksiy district court, the decision of the
Aksiy assistant district prosecutor dated 15 June 2007 not to open a criminal investigation.
On 20 August 2007, the Aksiy district court denied the author’s appeal. According to the
court’s ruling, there was no evidence of torture because the police officers had denied having
tortured the author and the author himself had attributed his injuries to a fall from a horse.
On 30 August 2007, the author appealed the ruling to the Jalalabad regional court. On 1
October 2007, the Jalalabad regional court upheld the decision of the district court. On 6
February 2008, the Supreme Court of Kyrgyzstan confirmed the rulings of the lower courts.
2.13
The author submits that he has exhausted all available domestic remedies.
Complaint
3.1
The author claims that he has suffered torture and ill-treatment at the hands of law
enforcement officers and that the State party has failed to take measures to give effect to the
rights recognized in the Covenant and to effectively investigate his complaints, in violation
of article 7, read alone and in conjunction with article 2 (2) and (3) (a), of the Covenant.
3.2
The author claims a violation of his rights under article 9 (3) and (4) of the Covenant
as his pretrial detention was ordered by the district prosecutor who was not qualified to
exercise judicial power in this regard. Despite the Committee’s recommendation to the State
party, in its concluding observations dated 24 July 2000,1 to ensure that all arrested persons
are promptly brought before a judge, the relevant amendments to the law were not signed by
the president until 25 June 2007.
3.3
The author alleges a violation of his rights under article 10 (1) of the Covenant because
he was held in pretrial detention without access to quality medical assistance despite an
obvious deterioration in his health and doctors’ recommendations to have him hospitalized.
He submits that, in his case, the State party failed to observe minimum standards of detention
on provision of medical care and treatment for sick prisoners, in accordance with rule 22 of
the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners.
1
CCPR/CO/69/KGZ, para. 9.
3