CCPR/C/122/D/2212/2012 asleep and turned over, the warders would wake him and the rest of his cell mates up and order them to adopt the above-mentioned position again. He wrote a letter of complaint to the Head of the State Security Agency pretrial detention centre, after which he was transferred to another cell, where he was again forced to sleep on the floor. His injured leg caused him substantial pain. The cell itself did not have a toilet and the author was allowed to use external toilet facilities only twice a day. He was subjected to humiliating daily searches, during which unidentified individuals in balaclavas forced him to run up and down steep stairs despite his injured leg, ordered him to remove his clothes, subjected him to verbal abuse and beat him with sticks. Each time he left his cell, the author was handcuffed, with his hands placed behind his back. 2.10 The author was deprived of contact with his relatives and did not receive any news from them for a month after his arrest. He was told that his wife had also been detained and that he would lose custody of his 3-year-old son and his family would be subjected to brutal measures unless he confessed.13 In particular, on 31 December 2010, the author was visited by the Head of the State Security Agency, who openly threatened the life and health of his wife and child. Since the author perfectly knew that the official in question had the power to deliver on that threat, he agreed to confess after their second encounter. During subsequent interrogations, the author’s “testimony” was discussed in advance by the police officer and the investigator in charge of the case and then recorded, in line with the interrogation protocol. Although the author’s lawyer was present, the author was not allowed to talk to or even look at him, so he did not receive any legal assistance. In the course of the interrogations, the author was subjected to psychological and physical pressure. He was also deprived of any contact with the outside world, including access to newspapers and public television. The author was forced to watch the so-called internal television channels, which broadcast anti-Semitic propaganda and footage of violent scenes. In March 2011, the author’s request to be hospitalized in order to receive treatment for an acute form of gout was rejected by the administration of the pretrial detention centre. On 8 April 2011, the author submitted a written complaint of torture and ill-treatment to the head of the unit in charge of investigating crimes against life, health and property of persons of Minsk City Department of Internal Affairs, but no investigation followed. 2.11 The author and his lawyers submitted complaints regarding the disproportionate use of force against him during his arrest and, on 20 December 2010, requested a medical examination of his injuries, but the request was rejected on 23 December 2010 by the State Security Agency investigator. The author’s lawyer filed an appeal against the rejection with the Prosecutor General of Belarus, through the bodies in charge of pretrial investigation. On 14 February 2011, he received a reply, signed by the same State Security Agency investigator, in which it was stated that the request for medical examination had already been decided upon and rejected. Thus, the appeal was never transmitted to the Prosecutor General’s Office. On 12 May 2011, during a hearing before Partizansky District Court, Minsk, the author stated that prison guards had tortured him, that he had been deprived of sleep and exposed to severe cold and that his family had been threatened in an effort to secure confessions. He testified that some of the evidence submitted by the Government had been obtained from him under duress. In response, the Prosecutor presented the court with a letter, dated 17 May 2011, signed by the Deputy Prosecutor of Minsk, stating that the author’s allegations had not been confirmed. The court did not order any further investigation of those allegations. In all his subsequent appeals, the author complained to no avail that he had been subjected to torture and ill-treatment while detained at the State Security Agency pretrial detention centre. 2.12 The author submits that, while the pretrial investigation regarding his case was being carried out, a number of State-controlled media outlets published articles or broadcast documentaries in which it was stated that he was guilty of having committed crimes in 13 According to Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, opinion No. 14/2012, para. 9, the author was forced to confess to attempting to carry out a coup d’état, armed resistance against representatives of the Government, planning pogroms and arson and organizing mass disorder accompanied by violence. 5