CAT/C/52/D/477/2011 did not meet with a psychiatrist, and therefore no psychological impact assessment was carried out. 5.7 On 19 March 2012, the complainant wrote to the Prosecutor-General requesting, inter alia: an examination of his left shoulder and the necessary medical care, since he could not lift his arm in the normal way and without experiencing pain; an ear, nose and throat examination; a neurological examination, given that he had experienced a significant loss of sensitivity in his limbs since the events complained of; and a psychiatric examination, as he was suffering from insomnia, stress and anxiety, among other symptoms. In the same letter, he applied for permission to designate one or more medical consultants and to have the expert medical examination conducted by a neutral international body (the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims) so that the equality of the parties would be ensured when the examination was conducted. He also asked to be assisted by counsel throughout the investigation procedure. He further requested access to a photograph album containing pictures of all the persons who had had charge of him on his arrival in Morocco, so that he could identify his aggressors. No reply to this letter has been received. 5.8 The complainant states that the inquiry was opened only after a considerable delay and evidence has therefore been lost. In addition, he has not been informed of the status of the inquiry, and his lawyers have not been authorized to assist him in that connection or been invited to provide any comments that they might wish to make. A number of basic required steps have not been taken, such as the organization of a confrontation (a face-toface meeting among all concerned parties), the provision of a compilation of photographs of persons who may have been his assailants, the transmittal of the prison file containing photographs of the complainant, etc. Neither he nor his counsel were informed that he was going to be interviewed and examined by a physician, nor was his consent to that evaluation sought. Since the defence was not given the opportunity to request that certain inquiries be made, the report on the investigation into his complaint of torture is woefully incomplete. The complainant therefore concludes that there was no effective remedy that he could have used to demonstrate that he was tortured or to prevent himself from being convicted on the basis of confessions obtained under torture. 5.9 With regard to the State party’s observations, he emphasizes that it is paradoxical to say, on the one hand, that an investigation into his allegations of torture is being conducted and, on the other, to state that the allegations are untrue because there is no mention of them in the transcripts of the hearings held by the investigating judge. Reports from international organizations attest to the existence of repeated cases of torture in Morocco, along with unfair trials and the impunity that prevails in that regard. The fact that his complaints were not initially reflected in the records of the proceedings in no way supports the conclusion that he had not been subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment. 5.10 The complainant notes that cases involving charges of terrorism are heard by judges who specialize in such proceedings. It can therefore be supposed that the judges responsible for his case file are the same ones who, in the past, have helped members of the Moroccan police and the National Surveillance Directorate (DST) to escape punishment for violations of the fundamental rights of accused persons and allowed statements obtained under torture to be used as evidence in legal proceedings. In particular, the involvement in his case of investigating judge C., who specializes in terrorism cases, and of trial judges at first instance who reportedly issued rulings in the Belliraj case gives reason to believe that torture could have been used yet again in the claimant’s case.6 The complainant refers to the Committee’s concluding observations regarding Morocco, in which the Committee 6 8 The complainant states that people who were prosecuted in the Belliraj case said that they had been subjected to ill-treatment and torture, but that no action was taken on their complaints. GE.14-06421