CCPR/C/116/D/1941/2010 interest of the proper administration of justice.8 The Committee further recalls that all trials in criminal matters must in principle be conducted orally and in public, unless the court decides to exclude all or part of the public for reasons of morals, public order (ordre public) or national security.9 Even in cases in which the public is excluded from a trial, the judgment, including the essential findings, evidence and legal reasoning, must be made public.10 The Committee observes that the State party has not refuted the allegations of the author that he was removed from part of the trial and that the verdict was been announced publicly, and thus failed to justify why these acts would be in the interest of the proper administration of justice. In these circumstances, due weight must be given to the author’s claims, and the Committee concludes that the facts before it disclose a violation of the author’s rights under article and 14 (1) and (3) (d) of the Covenant. 9. The Committee, acting under article 5 (4) of the Optional Protocol, is of the view that the State party has violated the author’s rights under article 7, read by itself and in conjunction with article 2 (3), as well as article 14 (1) and (3) (d) of the Covenant. 10. In accordance with article 2 (3) (a) of the Covenant, the State party is under an obligation to provide the author 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 author’s allegations of torture during pretrial detention; (b) provide him with detailed information on the results of the investigation; (c) prosecute, try and, if confirmed, punish those responsible for the violations committed; and (d) provide adequate compensation to the author for the violations suffered. The State party is also under an obligation to take measures to prevent similar violations in the future. 11. 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 to all individuals within its territory and subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognized in the Covenant and to provide an effective and enforceable remedy when it has been determined that a violation has occurred, 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 to have them widely disseminated in the State party. 8 9 10 8 See the Committee’s general comment No. 32 (2007) on the right to equality before courts and tribunals and to a fair trial, para. 36. Ibid., para. 29. Ibid.