E/CN.4/2001/66 page 129 Israel. He was charged with 23 serious offences and the court considered that he had the authority to order others to carry out such attacks and ordered that he be held in custody until the completion of his trial. He had used his rights to judicial review and three petitions on the question of legal representation have been heard by the Israeli High Court of Justice. On 10 and 18 July 2000, the High Court held that barring access to legal representation at various times during the investigation was, considering all the circumstances of the case, necessary for the continuation of the investigation and the security of the region. He was granted access to legal representation on 26 July 2000. He received close and continuous medical attention throughout his detention. On 10 July, the High Court was satisfied that all the necessary medical treatment had been provided. 663. On 5 September 2000, the Special Rapporteur sent a joint urgent appeal with the Chairman-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention on behalf of Nidal Daghlas, from Aseera Ashimalieh in the district of Nablus, who had reportedly been arrested on 27 August 2000 by Israeli security forces. He was allegedly shot three times at the time of arrest, sustaining injuries to his feet and left arm. He was subsequently interrogated for a period of four hours, during the course of which he was allegedly beaten. His whereabouts were not known. 664. By letter dated 24 October 2000, the Government responded that Nidal Daghlas was arrested on 27 August 2000 during an operation aimed at arresting Abu Hanud, a member of Hamas, in whose house he had been hiding. He was interrogated for a short time to ascertain Abu Hanud’s whereabouts. He was later transferred to the detention facility at Petah Tikvah, and his arrest was extended several times by a military judge. The Israeli security officers claimed that he had not been injured during the shooting, and medical examinations revealed that he was in good health. His lawyer, who had appealed to the Israeli Supreme Court to express concern about physical pressure put upon him and about his medical condition, withdrew her appeal once she learned that her complaints were baseless. Observations 665. The Special Rapporteur’s hope that the 1999 decision of the High Court of Justice would result in an end to the use of interrogation techniques involving torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment (see E/CN.4/2000/9, para. 675) have proved to be ill-founded. The use of “moderate physical pressure” and other torturous techniques appears still in evidence, although some of the most brutal techniques used in southern Lebanon will, of course, no longer be possible. The Special Rapporteur accepts that not all allegations will be well founded. Nevertheless, as long as the Government continues to detain persons incommunicado for exorbitant periods, itself a practice constituting cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment (as repeatedly confirmed by the Commission), the burden will be on the Government to prove that the allegations are untrue. This is a burden that it will not generally be able to discharge convincingly. Ivory Coast 666. By letter dated 8 November 2000, the Special Rapporteur reminded the Government of a number of cases transmitted in 1997 regarding which no reply had been received.