CCPR/C/118/D/2317/2013 notes that the medical documents submitted by the author suggest a number of injuries but do not specify their source and origin. The Committee further notes, however, that the State party has not provided specific details on the investigation carried out by the chief directorate for the enforcement of punishment. Nor has it provided to the Committee any documents supporting its statements on the health of the author upon his entry into prison and exit therefrom. The Committee additionally observes that the author was subject to an extended period of incommunicado detention (almost three months), a fact that the State party did not contest and which in itself can amount to a form of torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment, especially when the length of the period of incommunicado detention has not been prescribed by a legal authority and is, in effect, indefinite.4 It further notes that the author’s family has submitted at least 12 complaints (attached to the original submission) about author’s treatment in detention to various State authorities, including the Prosecutor General’s Office, the Tashkent City police department, the National Security Service and the Supreme Court, but no information was provided to the complainants about any investigative steps taken by the authorities in connection with the complaints. In the light of the above, and taking into account the specificity of the author’s allegations about the multiple acts of torture he was subjected to in pretrial detention facility No. 64/1, as well as the failure of the State party to refute those allegations with proper documentary evidence, and considering the specific context of the author’s prolonged detention in the pretrial facility, contrary to the requirements of domestic law, which has not been explained by the State party, 5 and the State party’s failure to carry out an effective investigation into the author’s allegations of torture, the Committee finds a violation of the author’s rights under article 7 of the Covenant, read alone and in conjunction with article 2 (3) of the Covenant. 10.3 The Committee notes the author’s allegation that his rights under article 9 of the Covenant were violated because he was kept in a police pretrial detention facility from 8 February 2009 to 7 September 2009, while under article 54 of the criminal implementation code of Uzbekistan a convicted person must be transferred from a pretrial detention facility to a prison at the latest 10 days after the final sentence of the court has been received by the detention facility. Having received no clarification on this claim from the State party, the Committee concludes that the author’s detention in pretrial facility No. 64/1 was not in accordance with the procedure as established by law. The Committee therefore finds a violation of the author’s rights under article 9 (1) of the Covenant. 10.4 The Committee notes the author’s claim concerning his prolonged incommunicado detention in pretrial detention facility No. 64/1 from 8 February 2009, and also notes that his lawyer was allowed to visit him for the first time on 4 May 2009 and that his wife saw him only on 8 October 2009, after his transfer to prison. The State party has not refuted the author’s claim, but argued that the author had refused to receive visits from his family. In view of its earlier finding about the inadequate response by the State party to allegations that the author’s rights under article 7 of the Covenant were violated, the Committee cannot attribute much probative value to the reported refusal by the author to receive family visits. It also notes that the State party did not claim that the author refused to receive visits from his lawyer. The Committee reiterates that persons deprived of their liberty may not be subjected to any hardship or constraint other than that resulting from the deprivation of 4 5 GE.17-01270 See communications No. 992/2001, Bousroual v. Algeria, Views adopted on 30 March 2006, para. 9.8, and No. 2297/2013, Chani v. Algeria, Views adopted on 11 March 2016, para. 7.3. See the committee’s general comment No. 20 (1992) on the prohibition of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 11. 9