CCPR/C/128/D/2367/2014 The facts as presented by the author 2.1 On 21 August 2010, the author was arrested on charges of sexual assault against his stepdaughter, a minor. Once in detention, he was also charged with eight other episodes of sexual assault. The author claims that he was beaten and deprived of food and sleep during his initial detention. From 21 August to 20 October 2010, during the preliminary investigation, the author did not have access to a lawyer, except on 1 October 2010. He was initially appointed a State-paid lawyer, K.B.K., but, the author claims, all interrogations were conducted in the lawyer’s absence. The lawyer’s signature, however, subsequently appeared on the records. On 20 October 2010, the author had an opportunity to study the criminal case against him, in the lawyer’s absence. Thus, it was also impossible for the author to file all complaints regarding the procedural violations against him. 2.2 The author submits that, even though he signed a letter of confession, his acceptance of guilt should not have been retained as evidence by the court. The author claims that he was brought to the police station by police officers, without a lawyer being present. Furthermore, according to the national legislation, the courts should disregard confessions “beaten out” of a suspect. The author claims that he was “practically beaten” by the investigator, S.M.B., into signing the confession. 2.3 On 31 March 2011, the Pravoberezhny District Court of Magnitogorsk found the author guilty and sentenced him to 13 years of imprisonment. 1 On 26 April 2011, the author filed a cassation appeal to the Chelyabinsk Regional Court, invoking the unlawful application of the criminal law and a violation of the criminal procedure law during the criminal proceedings. The author also claimed that he had been subjected to beatings upon arrest to force him to confess guilt. On 10 October 2010, the cassation appeal court rejected the author’s appeal. The court dismissed the claim that the author was beaten on the basis that the author had not invoked that claim earlier, for example during the interrogation in the presence of his lawyer. The court maintained that the author’s confession was voluntary. 2.4 On 18 October 2011, the author requested that the Chelyabinsk Regional Court carry out a supervisory review of the judgments of the district and regional courts. On 20 March 2012, the Court decided to refuse to initiate a supervisory review. On an unspecified date, the author submitted an appeal against that decision to the President of the Court. On 21 June 2012, the President of the Court rejected the appeal and confirmed the decision of the Court of 20 March 2012. On unspecified dates, the author submitted requests for a supervisory judicial review to the Supreme Court and the President of the Supreme Court; those requests were rejected on 15 August 2012 and 25 March 2013 respectively. 2.5 From 21 August to 1 November 2010, media sources reported on the author’s case, without disclosing his identity but referring to him as a paedophile who had sexually assaulted his stepdaughter. On 17 November 2010, a documentary entitled “Stepfatherrapist”, produced by the television station TV-IN and aired on the channel TVC-U, included interviews with investigators confirming that the author had committed a sexually motivated crime against his stepdaughter. That information was aired even before the trial had begun. On an unspecified date, the author filed a complaint to the Prosecutor of the Pravoberezhny District Court in Magnitogorsk, requesting a criminal investigation of the collaborators working with TV-IN on the basis that the documentary contained defamatory and confidential information. On 4 February 2011, the chief of the Police Department of the Ministry of the Interior decided not to initiate a criminal investigation, stating that the documentary did not disclose any confidential information and the collaborators working with TV-IN had acted lawfully. 2.6 The author submits that he has exhausted all available effective domestic remedies and notes that the subject matter of the communication is not being examined under any other procedure of international investigation or settlement. The complaint 3.1 The author claims that the beatings and ill-treatment to which he was subjected while in detention amount to a violation of his rights under article 7 of the Covenant. 1 2 The author is currently serving his sentence in a federal prison in the region of Chelyabinsk.