CAT/C/51/D/441/2010 2.5 The complainant, his attorney and his parents submitted numerous complaints regarding the ill-treatment to the Prosecutor’s Office and the courts, as well as to other authorities, none of which were examined on their merits. In particular, the complainant complained to a prosecutor during an interrogation on 10 December 2008 and again to the same prosecutor during an interrogation, in the presence of his lawyer, on 16 December 2008. On 21 January 2009, the complainant’s father submitted a written complaint to the Astana City Prosecutor’s Office regarding the ill-treatment of his son. On 18 May 2009, the complainant’s mother submitted another complaint in this respect to the Internal Security Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. On 22 May 2009, the complainant’s attorney requested the Prosecutor’s Office of Astana city to provide him with a copy of the formal refusal to open an investigation into the allegations of torture. A copy of the decision by an investigator of the Internal Security Division of the Department of Internal Affairs of Astana, dated 8 June 2009 and approved by the Head of the Prosecutor’s Office of Astana, was not provided until 26 June 2009, one week after the complainant was found guilty of murder. On an unspecified date in 2009, the decision of 8 June 2009 was appealed on behalf of the complainant by his parents to the prosecutor K.V. of the Prosecutor’s Office of Astana city, who also refused to open an investigation. In all cases, the authorities refused to open an investigation into the allegations of torture. 2.6 During the complainant’s trial before the Astana City Court and the second instance Supreme Court, the complainant’s allegations of torture were not taken into consideration. No one was ever held accountable for the torture inflicted on the complainant and he never received compensation or rehabilitation after being tortured. Throughout the trial he was denied unimpeded communication with his defence attorney and visits from his parents. On 16 June 2009, the complainant was declared guilty of the four murders and sentenced to life imprisonment. His appeal to the Supreme Court was rejected on 10 November 2009, as it found the judgment of the court of first instance to be lawful and the complainant’s arguments groundless. In addition, the complainant submits that lodging a complaint before the Supreme Court within the supervisory review proceedings concerning the fact of his torture would have been futile, as D.T., who was convicted together with the complainant, had submitted such a complaint, but it was left without examination. Consequently, the complainant maintains that he has exhausted all the available domestic remedies. The complaint 3.1 The complainant claims that his rights under article 1 of the Convention were violated by the State party, since he was tortured by State officials to force him confess his guilt in a multiple murder. 3.2 He further claims that his rights under article 2 of the Convention were violated, as the State party did not take effective administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent the acts of torture against him either during the extradition process, or while he was in pretrial detention. 3.3 He claims to be a victim of a violation of his rights under articles 12 and 13 of the Convention, since the State party authorities failed to conduct a prompt and impartial investigation into his allegations of torture. 3.4 The complainant also claims that his rights under article 14 of the Convention were violated, as the authorities did not offer him redress and adequate compensation, including rehabilitation. 3.5 Finally, he claims to be victim of a violation of his rights under article 15 of the Convention, because the courts retained his forced confessions when establishing his guilt in a crime. 4