CCPR/C/113/D/2079/2011 4.3 The State party further claims that the information provided by the author about “unlawful detention” and “misconduct” on the part of police officers has not been confirmed. Author’s comments on the State party’s observations on the merits 5.1 On 9 April 2012, Mr. Khadzhiev submitted his comments on the State party’s observations on the merits of the communication. He noted that instead of providing specific responses, the State party tried to focus on unimportant facts. For example, he claims that he was first accused of espionage, but afterwards, he was charged and convicted of being in possession of several bullet cartridges. The author reiterates that the State party organized his persecution because of his political views and his relatives, who are wellknown opposition members. 5.2 The author submits that the State party did not honour the Committee’s request for documents relating to his case, and reiterates that he himself does not have access to those documents. He adds that it was due to the pressure by the international community that he was first allowed to see his relatives, but that was only at the end of August 2007. The State party’s claim about the number of visits he was allowed to receive from relatives does not correspond to the reality. After submitting the present complaint to the Committee, the author was able to meet with his relatives only once. In addition, his relatives were able to give him food only three times. Since 2007 and for four years, the author was able to use the medical services only two times, despite his complaints about heart problems and issues with internal organs. 5.3 The author also submits that his right to receive and send correspondence and have access to newspapers, magazines and television is still being violated by the prison administration. His relatives are still subjected to psychological pressure aimed at getting them to stop complaining to international organizations and to provide the State party with a letter to the effect that they have free access to the author.3 5.4 On 6 July 2012, commenting on the State party’s submission of excerpts from the Criminal Code of Turkmenistan, the author reiterates his position and claims that the State party purposefully avoided answering the substantive issues raised in the communication. He further claims that the law enforcement agencies did not have any evidence of his guilt and that he is currently being held unlawfully.4 Further submissions from the State party 6.1 By note verbale of 24 September 2012, the State party submits that according to article 433 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Turkmenistan, the convicted person is provided with the copy of his sentence “no later than five days” after the pronouncement of the conviction by the court. The sentence that was handed down to Mr. Khadzhiev was based on law and he subsequently received a copy of it.5 6.2 On 18 March 2013, the State party reiterates that all convicts in correctional facilities are provided with “adequate food and clean water” and have access to medical services. The State party further submits that, on 15 February 2013, the President of 3 4 5 On 28 April 2012, the Committee, acting through its Special Rapporteur on New Communications and Special Measures, requested the State party to abstain from “any acts of pressure, intimidation or reprisal against the author and his relatives” made in connection with the present communication. The counsel for the author confirmed the author’s release in his letter dated 12 December 2013, however, he noted that the author was pardoned only three months prior to his normal release date. The State party does not provide any other details regarding this issue. 5