CCPR/C/113/D/2079/2011 contended, without any other information or evidence in substantiation, that the “use of misconduct” against him has not been confirmed. 8.3 The Committee recalls that the burden of proof cannot rest solely on the author of the communication, especially considering that the author and the State party do not always have equal access to evidence and that frequently the State party alone has access to the relevant information.7 It is implicit in article 4, paragraph 2, of the Optional Protocol that the State party has the duty to investigate, in good faith, all allegations of violations of the Covenant made against it and its representatives, and to provide the Committee with the information available to it. In cases where the author has submitted allegations to the State party that are corroborated by credible evidence, and where further clarification depends on information that is solely in the hands of the State party, the Committee may consider the author’s allegations substantiated in the absence of satisfactory evidence or explanations to the contrary from the State party.8 8.4 The Committee further recalls that the State party is responsible for the security of all persons held in detention and that, when there are allegations of torture and mistreatment, it is incumbent on the State party to produce evidence refuting the author’s allegations. Moreover, once a complaint about ill-treatment contrary to the provisions of article 7 of the Covenant has been filed, a State party must investigate it promptly and impartially. Where investigations reveal violations of certain Covenant rights, the State party must ensure that those responsible are brought to justice.9 8.5 The Committee also notes that, despite its repeated requests to obtain documents pertaining to the present communication, the State party has failed to produce them. The State party has not provided any information as to whether an inquiry was undertaken by the authorities, in the context of both the criminal investigation and the present communication, to address the detailed and specific allegations advanced by the author regarding his alleged ill-treatment aimed at obtaining confessions under coercion. Moreover, the State party has failed to provide the Committee with the transcripts of the trial and the copies of the author’s complaints to the Office of the Prosecutor’s and to the Ashgabat City Court, despite having been specifically requested to do so by the Committee. In those circumstances, and in the absence of information about the conduct of any “prompt and impartial” investigation regarding the author’s torture claims, the Committee decides to give due weight to the author’s sufficiently substantiated allegations. Accordingly, it concludes that the facts, as submitted, reveal a violation of the author’s rights under article 7 and article 14, paragraph 3 (g), of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 8.6 The Committee further notes the author’s claims that his rights under article 9, paragraph 1, were also violated as he was unlawfully detained for three days, from 16 to 18 June 2006, in violation of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code of Turkmenistan. He was held in detention until 18 June 2006 without being able to initiate any form of legal process through which his apprehension and the lawfulness of his detention could be challenged and without his relatives being informed of his whereabouts. In the absence of 7 8 9 Communications No. 1422/2005, El Hassy v. Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Views adopted on 24 October 2007, para. 6.7; No. 1297/2004, Medjnoune v. Algeria, Views adopted on 14 July 2006, para. 8.3, and No. 1804/2008, Il Khwildy v. Libya, Views adopted on 1 November 2012, para. 7.2; See, inter alia, communication No. 1776/2008, Bashasha and Bashasha v. Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Views adopted on 20 October 2010, para. 7.2. See, inter alia, communication No. 1225/2003, Eshonov v. Russian Federation, Views adopted on 22 July 2010, para. 9.8; and Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 31 (2004) on the nature of the general legal obligation imposed on States parties to the Covenant, para. 18. 7