CCPR/C/112/D/1773/2008 part of the authors, it is not in a position to recognize the validity and legitimacy of either the communication or the additional information submitted. 6.2 It explains that, on humanitarian grounds, on 16 August 2008, Mr. Kozulin was released by Presidential Decree and contends that the author has omitted that fact on purpose, in an attempt to deprive the Committee of full information and have an objective consideration of the case. Thus, the author continues to exert pressure on the Committee by submitting subjective and politically motivated assessments regarding Mr. Kozulin’s imprisonment, extraneous to the substance of the case. It interprets the author’s actions as an abuse of the right of submission and invites the Committee to declare the case inadmissible. Additional submission from the alleged victim 7.1 On 24 March 2009, Mr. Kozulin commented on the State party’s observations of 14 October 2008. 7.2 He notes that it remains uncontested that, on 2 March 2006 he was arrested by officers in plain clothes, without explanation. It remains also unrefuted that, on 25 March 2006, he was detained for more than 20 hours without the possibility of contacting his counsel or family; the legality of the decision to keep him in custody on 25 March 2006 was taken on 12 April 2006, i.e. a court endorsed his detention 18 days after his actual apprehension. 7.3 He notes that the State party has failed to prove that the 25 March 2006 gathering was not peaceful or that it breached the public order, or to explain why the Minister of Internal Affairs’ statement on the same day, designating him as a culprit, was broadcast on a public television station. 7.4 He believes that the State party failed to present sufficient arguments regarding the fact that, during five hot summer days of court hearings, he was denied fresh water. Moreover, the court dismissed his motions to summon additional witnesses. 7.5 He finally notes that the State party did not prove its full commitment to providing him with adequate medical care. During his detention, he suffered from hyperaemia, pain and other signs of inflammation as he was frequently handcuffed. In addition, during his hunger strike, his state of health deteriorated but he could not communicate with his counsel. Issues and proceedings before the Committee Consideration of admissibility 8.1 Before considering any claim contained in a communication, the Human Rights Committee must determine whether it is admissible under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 8.2 As required under article 5, paragraph 2 (a), of the Optional Protocol, the Committee has ascertained that the same matter is not being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement. 8.3 The Committee notes first the State party’s objection regarding the acceptance for examination of the present communication, as it was not submitted by the alleged victim. It notes the author’s explanation, provided when submitting the case, that the penitentiary administration prevented Mr. Kozulin from preparing a power of attorney. It also notes that, subsequently, Mr. Kozulin has submitted duly signed comments to the State party’s observations on admissibility and merits of the communication, thus confirming his interest 13