CAT/C/RWA/CO/2 failure to investigate, criminally prosecute, or to allow civil proceedings related to allegations of acts of torture in a prompt manner may constitute a de facto denial of redress and thus constitute a violation of the State’s obligations under article 14. The Committee urges the State party to: (a) Ensure that all allegations of torture and other ill-treatment perpetrated by military personnel are effectively and impartially investigated by an independent authority, and that perpetrators and the officials in the chain of command, whether by acts of instigation, consent or acquiescence, are prosecuted and, if found guilty, punished; (b) Ensure that victims and their families obtain full reparation and are protected at all times against retaliation for vindicating their rights; (c) Install video recording equipment for its use during all interrogations in military and other places of custody where detainees may be present, except in cases in which the rights of detainees to privacy or to confidential communication with their lawyer or doctor may be violated; (d) Store recordings in secure facilities and make them available to investigators, detainees and their lawyers and national human rights monitoring mechanisms. Coerced confessions 20. The Committee notes with concern that, although the Rwandan Law on Evidence prohibits the use of confessions or evidence obtained through torture, it requires proof that judicial admissions were the result of physical torture. Consequently, the burden of proof falls on the accused to prove that the confession was obtained through torture, as confirmed by the delegation of the State party. In view of the above, the Committee is seriously concerned over consistent reports indicating that judges often refuse to consider scars or medical documents as evidence of torture and do not order a forensic examination of the defendant or an investigation into the torture allegations. The Committee is, furthermore, concerned by the State party’s response that there were no cases in which detainees alleged that their confessions were extracted through torture, particularly because several defendants alleged in their public trials that their earlier confessions or testimonies were reportedly extracted through torture, and some of them were convicted on the basis of those confessions (art. 15). 21. The State party should: (a) Make the necessary legislative amendments to the Rwandan Law on Evidence to ensure that: confessions or statements obtained by mental or physical torture are inadmissible, except in proceedings against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made; and that the burden of proof does not lie with the victim, as the delegation has claimed, but with the State; (b) Ensure that a forensic medical examination is immediately ordered and that the necessary steps are taken to ensure that the allegations of torture are promptly and properly investigated; (c) Ensure that law enforcement officials, judges and lawyers receive training on how to detect and investigate cases in which confessions are obtained under torture; (d) Make sure that the competent authorities take action against judges who fail to respond appropriately to allegations of torture raised during judicial proceedings; (e) Ensure that officials who extract confessions through torture are immediately brought to justice; (f) Adopt the measures required to permit proceedings to be reopened on the ground that they were held on the basis of confessions extracted under torture. 5