CAT/C/60/D/612/2014
2.7
A judicial police officer was then assigned to continue the questioning, asking A.N.
the same questions. Ten minutes later, the deputy commissioner reappeared and violently
struck the complainant on his right arm, forcing him to sign a document by placing his
mark on it.
2.8
The complainant’s arm was broken. He still suffers from the serious physical and
psychological scars of the abuse to which he was subjected.
2.9
During their visit to the Muyinga police station on the same day, observers from the
United Nations Office in Burundi (BNUB) were able to meet with A.N. They noted marks
of torture on his body, including the arm fracture.
2.10 The same day, around 10 a.m., the complainant was transferred to the Muyinga
prison, where a nurse noted the injury to his right arm and dressed it, mentioning that it was
possibly broken. It was only five days later that A.N. was taken to the hospital in Muyinga.
However, as the doctor was not available, he was returned to the prison. In the following
days, his requests to see a doctor went unheeded, despite the fact that he was in terrible pain.
He was treated by other prisoners and kept the same bandage for two months.
2.11 During his detention, A.N. shared a cell with 80 other persons. The room had only a
few small windows in the ceiling and was very poorly lit. He had to sleep on the cold
cement floor, without a mattress.
2.12 On 3 May 2011, a pretrial court chamber was organized to determine whether the
detention of the complainant was legal; the result was that he remained in detention. At the
hearing, A.N. immediately reported the abuse to which he had been subjected during his
questioning by the deputy commissioner, but his allegations were given absolutely no
follow-up. Moreover, as the hearing took place so soon after the events and the victim still
had obvious marks of the beatings on his body, the investigating magistrate was beyond any
doubt able to see those marks for himself. Yet the investigating magistrate told A.N. that
the fact that his arm was swollen was not evidence of torture, as there was no proof that he
had sustained the injury at the police station.
2.13 On 10 May 2011, observers from the United Nations Office in Burundi met the
Muyinga prosecutor and asked him to open an inquiry into the abuse to which A.N. and the
six other detainees held on the same grounds had been subjected during questioning. At the
insistence of the observers, the prosecutor’s office launched a judicial investigation. The
investigating magistrate heard A.N. and two other defendants on 12 July 2011, 79 days
after the events. During the hearing, the complainant again reported the abuse to which he
had been subjected at the deputy commissioner’s office. He was also able to show visible
marks of the beatings all over his body, and his still heavily swollen arm. However, no
medical examiner’s report was requested by the prosecutor.
2.14 On 14 July 2011, A.N. and two defendants filed a collective complaint against the
Muyinga deputy commissioner and the police chief at the Buhinzuya police station. The
case was transferred on 26 March 2012 by the Muyinga public prosecutor (as the persons
cited in the complaint were exempt from jurisdiction) to the Ngozi Court of Appeal, where
it was registered. However, no investigation was initiated. The persons cited in the
complaint were never questioned and were never the subject of any sanctions. No medical
examiner’s report was ever ordered. Furthermore, according to information sent by the
prosecutor to BNUB officials, the case file registered following the intervention by BNUB
vanished after it was transferred to the Ngozi Court of Appeal. BNUB officials on several
occasions requested that the file should be located, to no avail.
2.15 The case was also the subject of a report on Radio Isanganiro, one of the most
listened to radio stations in Burundi.
2.16 On 12 July 2011 the complainant was heard at the Muyinga tribunal de grande
instance (court of major jurisdiction) in the context of the criminal proceedings brought
against him for participation in armed gangs and for State security offences. The judge
questioned him about leaflets and the preparation of a rebellion. The complainant denied
the accusations. He again complained of the torture to which he had been subjected, to no
avail. The judge asked the complainant to provide medical evidence to support his
allegations. He tried to obtain such proof, without success. The prison director refused to
GE.17-09955
3