CAT/C/UZB/CO/4 Evidence obtained through torture 16. The Committee is concerned about numerous allegations that persons deprived of their liberty were subjected to torture or ill-treatment for the purpose of compelling a forced confession and that such confessions were subsequently admitted as evidence in court in the absence of a thorough investigation into the torture allegations. The Committee is further concerned at the failure of the State party to provide the Committee with information on cases in which judges have deemed confessions inadmissible on the grounds that they were obtained through torture, or with data on the number of cases in which judges have sought investigations into allegations made by defendants that they confessed to a crime as a result of torture (art. 15). The State party should ensure that any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made, by: (a) Including the prohibition explicitly in all relevant articles of the criminal procedure code; (b) Ensuring that judges ask all defendants in criminal cases whether or not they were tortured or ill-treated in custody and order independent medical examinations whenever necessary; (c) Ensuring in law that judges are mandated to order an investigation when provided with prima facie evidence of torture during habeas corpus hearings; (d) Providing the Committee with information on any cases in which confessions were deemed inadmissible on the grounds that they were obtained through torture and indicating whether any officials have been prosecuted and punished for extracting such confessions. Independent complaints mechanism 17. Notwithstanding the efforts of the State party to investigate complaints of torture, such as through instruction 334 of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, special staff inspection units and the Parliamentary Ombudsperson, the Committee is concerned that, according to numerous reports, these bodies have not been effective in combating torture and lack independence (art. 13). The State party should ensure in law and in practice that every person has the right to complain of torture or ill-treatment to an effective and fully independent mechanism that will investigate and respond promptly and should ensure that the Parliamentary Ombudsperson is fully independent. Independent monitoring of places of detention 18. While noting the affirmation of the State party that all places of detention are monitored by independent national and international organizations and that they would welcome further inspections, the Committee remains concerned at information it has received indicating the virtual absence of independent and regular monitoring of the places of detention. The Committee is further concerned at the information it has received about measures taken by the State party that have impeded the work of numerous independent human rights organizations which previously operated in the State party. The Committee is alarmed by the announcement in April 2013 by the International Committee of the Red Cross that it was ceasing its visits to places of detention in the State party on the grounds that it had been unable to follow its working procedures, rendering such visits “pointless” (arts. 2, 11, 12 and 13). 7