Suleymane Guengueng and others v. Senegal (No. 181/2001); Ristic v. Serbia and Montenegro (No. 113/1998); Encarnación Blanco Abad v. Spain (No. 59/1996); Urra Guridi v. Spain (No. 212/2002); Agiza v. Sweden (No. 233/2003); Thabti v. Tunisia (No. 187/2001); Abdelli v. Tunisia (No. 188/2001); M’Barek v. Tunisia (No. 60/1996); Saadia Ali v. Tunisia (No. 291/2006); Chipana v. Venezuela (No. 110/1998); Pelit v. Azerbaijan (No. 281/2005); Bachan Singh Sogi v. Canada (No. 297/2006); Tebourski v. France (No. 300/2006); and Besim Osmani v. Republic of Serbia (No. 261/2005) (response from State party not due until 9 August 2009). 94. During the forty-first and forty-second sessions, the Special Rapporteur on follow-up to decisions presented new follow-up information that had been received since the last annual report with respect to the following cases: Suleymane Guengueng and others v. Senegal (No. 181/2001); Agiza v. Sweden (No. 233/2003); Bachan Singh Sogi v. Canada (No. 297/2006); Jean-Patrick Iya v. Switzerland (No. 299/2006); A. v. the Netherlands (No. 91/1997); Encarnación Blanco Abad v. Spain (No. 59/1996); Urra Guridi v. Spain (No. 212/2002); M’Barek v. Tunisia (No. 60/1996); Saadia Ali v. Tunisia (No. 291/2006). 95. Represented below is a comprehensive report of replies received with regard to all 48 cases in which the Committee has found violations of the Convention to date and in 1 case in which although the Committee did not find a violation of the Convention it did make a recommendation. Complaints in which the Committee has found violations of the Convention up to the forty-second session State party AUSTRIA Case Halimi-Nedibi Quani, 8/1991 Nationality and country of removal if applicable Yugoslav Views adopted on 18 November 1993 Issues and violations found Failure to investigate allegations of torture article 12 Interim measures granted and State party response None Remedy recommended The State party is requested to ensure that similar violations do not occur in the future. Due date for State party response None Date of reply 12 January 2007 State party response The decision of the Committee was communicated to the heads of all public prosecutors’ offices. The prosecution authorities were asked to follow the 139