CCPR/C/112/D/2046/2011 and under articles 9 and 10, paragraph 1, refer to his arrest, detention and conviction in 1988, i.e., before the entry into force of the Optional Protocol for the State party. The Committee therefore finds that this part of the communication is inadmissible ratione temporis pursuant to article 1 of the Optional Protocol. 5.5 Furthermore, in her allegations under article 7 with regard to Saleh Salem Hmeed, the author has not sufficiently substantiated her claim to the continuous effects of the illtreatment to which he was subjected; therefore, these effects cannot in themselves be said to constitute a violation of the Covenant. 8 The Committee finds that the claim with regard to Saleh Salem Hmeed under articles 7, 9 and 10, paragraph 1, read alone and in conjunction with article 2, paragraph 3, of the Covenant, is inadmissible ratione temporis under article 1 of the Optional Protocol. 5.6 The Committee considers that the rest of the author’s allegations have been sufficiently substantiated for the purposes of admissibility, and proceeds to its consideration on the merits of the author’s claims under articles 2 (para. 3) 7, 9 (paras. 1–5), 17 (para. 1), 19 and 23 (para. 1), of the Covenant. Consideration of the merits 6.1 The Human Rights Committee has considered the present communication in the light of all the information made available to it, as required under article 5, paragraph 1, of the Optional Protocol. As the State party has not replied to the author’s allegations, due weight must be given to those allegations to the extent that they have been sufficiently substantiated. Treatment of Al Sadek Saleh Hmeed, Al Mahdi Saleh Hmeed, Fredj Saleh Hmeed, Ali Saleh Hmeed and Adel Saleh Hmeed (the author’s sons) and of the author herself 6.2 The Committee has taken note of the author’s allegations that, on 15 February 2007, after her sons had accepted the invitation of human rights defenders to attend a peaceful sitin, some 50 security officers came to the family home, brutally beat the author and her son Fredj Saleh Hmeed and arrested him without a warrant; that, on 16 February 2007, security officers came to the homes of her sons Al Sadek Saleh Hmeed, Al Mahdi Saleh Hmeed, Ali Saleh Hmeed and Adel Saleh Hmeed and arrested them without a warrant and without informing them of the grounds for their arrest; that, following their arrest, her sons were held in complete isolation in tiny cells and deprived of all contact with the outside world; that they were tortured, brutally beaten and kept tied up; and that they were deliberately denied medical treatment for five months, despite being in a serious condition requiring monitoring in hospital, as was later observed. In the absence of any information from the State party, the Committee finds that the information provided to it demonstrates that the State party violated articles 7 and 9 of the Covenant with regard to Fredj Saleh Hmeed, Al Sadek Saleh Hmeed, Al Mahdi Saleh Hmeed, Ali Saleh Hmeed, Adel Saleh Hmeed and the author herself. 6.3 Having found a violation of articles 7 and 9 of the Covenant, the Committee will not consider the author’s claims under articles 19 and 21 of the Covenant separately. Treatment of the family home 6.4 The Committee has taken note of the author’s allegations that, on 15 February 2007, security officers under the command of the director of the criminal investigation service of 8 8 See communications Nos. 2042/2011, Huseynov v. Azerbaijan, decision of inadmissibility adopted on 21 July 2014, para. 6.6; and 1070/2002, Kouidis v. Greece, Views adopted on 28 March 2006, para. 6.3. GE.14-22374