CCPR/C/120/D/2170/2012 failure by a State party to investigate allegations of violations could in and of itself give rise to a separate breach of the Covenant. In the present case, the Committee notes that Mrs. Neupane, immediately after having been informed of her husband’s detention by the Nepal Police, visited the District Police Office and other detention facilities in Kathmandu to gather information about his arrest. She also filed two writs of habeas corpus petitions with the Supreme Court. Despite the efforts to locate her husband, the State party has not undertaken an independent and thorough investigation to elucidate the circumstances surrounding Mr. Neupane’s detention, fate and whereabouts. In this regard, the Committee considers that the State party has failed to conduct a prompt, thorough and effective investigation into the disappearance of Mr. Neupane. Additionally, the sum received by the authors as interim relief does not constitute an adequate remedy commensurate with the serious violations committed. Accordingly, the Committee concludes that the facts before it reveal a violation of article 2 (3), read in conjunction with articles 6 (1), 7, 9 and 16, of the Covenant with regard to Mr. Neupane, and article 2 (3), read in conjunction with article 7, of the Covenant with respect to the authors. 11. The Committee, acting under article 5 (4) of the Optional Protocol, is of the view that the information before it discloses violations by the State party of articles 6, 7, 9 and 16 of the Covenant and of article 2 (3), read in conjunction with articles 6, 7, 9 and 16, with regard to Danda Pani Neupane. The facts also disclose violations of articles 7 and 2 (3), read in conjunction with article 7, with respect to the authors, Shanta Neupane and Nisha Neupane. 12. In accordance with article 2 (3) (a) of the Covenant, the State party is under an obligation to provide the authors with an effective remedy. This requires it to make full reparation to individuals whose Covenant rights have been violated. Accordingly, the State party is obligated, inter alia, to: (a) conduct a thorough and effective investigation into the disappearance of Mr. Neupane and provide the authors with detailed information about the results of its investigation; (b) locate his remains, if Mr. Neupane is no longer alive, and hand them over to his family; (c) prosecute, try and punish those responsible for the violations committed and make the results of such measures public; (d) ensure that any necessary and adequate psychological rehabilitation and medical treatment are made available to the authors; and (e) provide adequate compensation and appropriate measures of satisfaction to the authors and to Mr. Neupane, if he is still alive, for the violations suffered. The State party is also under an obligation to take steps to prevent the occurrence of similar violations in the future. In particular, the State party should ensure that: (a) its legislation allows for the criminal prosecution of those responsible for serious human rights violations such as torture, extrajudicial execution and enforced disappearance; and (b) any enforced disappearances give rise to a prompt, impartial and effective investigation. 13. Bearing in mind that, by becoming a party to the Optional Protocol, the State party has recognized the competence of the Committee to determine whether there has been a violation of the Covenant and that, pursuant to article 2, the State party has undertaken to ensure for all individuals within its territory or subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognized in the Covenant and to provide an effective and enforceable remedy when a violation has been established, the Committee wishes to receive from the State party, within 180 days, information about the measures taken to give effect to the Committee’s Views. The State party is also requested to publish the present Views and disseminate them widely in the official languages of the State party. 11