A/HRC/28/68/Add.1 responsables así como la ausencia del derecho a la verdad de toda la sociedad. El Relator Especial reitera su llamamiento al Gobierno a asegurar la investigación, procesamiento y eventual condena de los responsables de las violaciones del art. 1 de la CAT acontecidas en otros países, por presuntos autores que no son nacionales y contra víctimas también extranjeras. (b) JAL 28/07/2014 Case No. ESP 4/2014 State Reply: None to date Alegaciones relativas al proyecto de “Ley orgánica para la protección de la vida del concebido y los derechos de la mujer embarazada”, el cual limitaría el acceso al aborto para las mujeres y niñas en España. 485. El Relator Especial lamenta que, hasta la fecha, el Gobierno de España no haya respondido a la presente comunicación, y por ello, considera que no ha cumplido con su deber de cooperar con el mandato establecido por el Consejo de Derechos Humanos en la resolución 25/13. Asimismo, el Relator Especial considera que el Gobierno no ha cumplido con la obligación emanada de la norma consuetudinaria internacional de investigar, juzgar y sancionar todos los actos de tortura y los tratos crueles, inhumanos o degradantes, como establece, inter alia, la Convención contra la Tortura (CAT). 486. Ante la falta de información que indique lo contrario, el Relator concluye que el Gobierno de España, al no garantizar a las mujeres y niñas el más alto nivel posible de salud al imponer ciertos requisitos que funcionarían como obstáculos para la realización del aborto es responsable por sus sufrimientos físicos y mentales en los que esta medida pueda derivar y ha violado sus derechos a no ser torturadas o sometidas a tratos crueles, inhumanos o degradantes como afirman los artículos 1 y 16 del CAT. Sri Lanka JAL 07/07/2014 Case No. LKA 7/2014 State Replies: 18/08/2014 and 26/11/2014 Allegations concerning Ms. X, a woman of Tamil origin who has reportedly been beaten up and repeatedly harassed since she reported two military officers raped her. 487. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of Sri Lanka for its replies dated 18.08.2014 and 26.11.2014 to the present communication. 488. The Rapporteur takes note of the information provided by the Government, confirming that four army officers (three corporals and one private) were indicted for their involvement in the rape in 2010 of Ms. X; that Ms. X’s home was raided in February 2014 by the Mullaithivu Division Police Anti-Vice Unit; and that a warrant for her arrest on charges of selling liquor without a license was outstanding as of November 2014 due to her failure to appear in court. 489. The Government’s reply explained that the four army soldiers were indicted by the Attorney General in August 3, 2012, and that the accused were terminated by the army. As of the Government’s reply, the proceedings had not ended and therefore the four accused have not yet been convicted, although the rape occurred in 2010 more than four years earlier. In addition, the Government’s reply insists that the actions of State agents against Ms. X that took place in 2004 (and were the object of the Rapporteur’s latest communication), purporting to charge her with unauthorized sale of liquor, are “unrelated” to her complaint of having been raped in 2010. The Rapporteur finds this answer unsatisfactory, since the first action of this sort, in May 2013, happened two days before the court was to hold the trial of the four soldiers for the rape of Ms. X, and the several subsequent acts seem to constitute harassment as the proceedings in the rape case are continuing. The Government claims to have no record of, and the reply fails to address the subsequent alleged attack on 22 March 2014 and the arrest in May 2013. 83