CAT/C/UZB/CO/5 (i) Afforded, in law and in practice, all fundamental legal safeguards from the very outset of their deprivation of liberty, including unimpeded access to an independent lawyer of their choice or, if necessary, to free legal aid, including during the initial interrogation and inquiry, in line with the Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers and the United Nations Principles and Guidelines on Access to Legal Aid in Criminal Justice Systems; (ii) Informed about the charges against them and about their rights, both orally and in writing, in a language that they understand; (iii) Brought promptly before a judge; (iv) Allowed to notify a family member or any other person of their choice of their detention immediately after apprehension; (v) Given immediate access to an independent medical examination, free of charge, including on request, by a doctor of their choice; (b) detention; Establish registers of injuries and violent incidents in all places of (c) Establish a central register of detention regarding all persons at all stages of their deprivation of liberty and inform the Committee on the type of information recorded and on specific measures taken to ensure accurate recordkeeping as an important safeguard against incommunicado and arbitrary detention and enforced disappearance; (d) Monitor the compliance of all public officials with fundamental legal safeguards, including through video monitoring of all places of deprivation of liberty and of interrogation rooms; (e) Ensure a normative framework for the effective oversight of the provision of safeguards and take disciplinary measures against officials who fail to afford fundamental legal safeguards to persons deprived of their liberty in practice; (f) Provide information to the Committee on the number of complaints received regarding failure to respect fundamental legal safeguards and on the outcome of such complaints in the State party’s next report to the Committee. Application of habeas corpus provisions 31. The Committee remains concerned (CAT/C/UZB/CO/4, para. 15) that domestic legislation has not been amended to permit judges to assess the legality of detention in habeas corpus hearings, and that such hearings are closed and the participation of defence lawyers is not mandatory (arts. 2, 11–13, 15 and 16). 32. The Committee reiterates its recommendation (CAT/C/UZB/CO/4, para. 15) that the State party should: (a) Amend the criminal procedure code to provide judges with the competence to assess the legality of detention during habeas corpus hearings and apply less restrictive alternatives to detention during such hearings; (b) Amend article 243 of the criminal procedure code to ensure the mandatory presence of defence counsel of the detainee’s choice at the habeas corpus hearing and ensure that all such hearings are public and accessible to independent monitors; (c) Revise its legislation to ensure that persons deprived of their liberty, whether detained on criminal or administrative grounds, must be brought to a habeas corpus hearing within 48 hours of deprivation of liberty. Independence of the judiciary 33. Although it welcomes the creation by the parliament on 28 March 2017 of the Supreme Judicial Council and of the Supreme School of Judges, the Committee is concerned with the continued weakness and inefficiency of the judiciary and the precariousness of the security of tenure for judges. The Committee is also concerned with the predominant role of the prosecution in criminal proceedings; the broad and vague 8