has been committed, it may seize the Indictments Chamber. A complaint may be brought before the Indictments Chamber by the Public Prosecutor or by the President of the Chamber. After having been seized of a complaint, the Indictments Chamber initiates an inquiry, and hears the public prosecutor and the criminal investigation officer under suspicion. The SPT notes that Benin has reported to the Committee Against Torture that, pursuant to these rules, some criminal investigation officers have been suspended from duty and in other cases remarks have been addressed to officers at fault. The investigations were conducted following complaints by victims. The SPT requests further information and concrete examples of such investigations and sanctions imposed on officers at fault for the years 2005 – 2008. 50.Article 551 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that, when a judicial police officer is suspected of having committed a crime, the Prosecutor must seize the Judicial Chamber of the Supreme Court without delay, who must render a judgment within eight days. The SPT requests further information and concrete examples of such investigations and sanctions imposed on such officers for the years 2005 – 2008. 5.Monitoring by NGOs 51.The SPT notes that the State Party has made public declarations that it intends to grant NGOs permanent access to places of detention. However, the SPT was informed that in practice such access had not been granted, and that NGOs encountered hindrances when attempting to visit places of detention, and in particular prisons. The SPT recommends that the authorities develop clear and objective criteria for selecting NGOs to be granted the right to visit places of detention, and that they consider granting those NGOs pe rmanent authorization to visit. 6.Provision for legal representation/legal aid 52.The SPT notes that the Code of Criminal Procedure does not allow for the right to a lawyer during garde à vue (see also paragraph 83 below). 53.The draft code of criminal procedure provides for the assistance of a lawyer from the start of the preliminary investigation. A duly accredited lawyer may be present at all questioning sessions. The SPT considers the right to have a lawyer present from the very beginning of the criminal investigation as an important means of preventing torture and illtreatment. It welcomes the proposed change in the legislation and requests further information on how Benin intends to ensure that access to a lawyer is guaranteed to all persons who are deprived of their liberty, including those who cannot afford to retain a lawyer. 54.Article 240 of the Code of Criminal Procedure currently in force provides that the court can appoint a lawyer before the Trial Court (Cour d ’ Assises) if the accused refuses to choose a lawyer; that the prévenu can be represented by a lawyer before the Tribunal of first instance (article 386 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) and the Court of Appeal (article 476); and that the inculpé can be represented in all proceedings before the investigating judge (articles 98 and 99). The SPT notes that the investigation judge (juge d ’ instruction) must inform the detainee of his right to a lawyer during the first hearing before the judge (article 98 of the Code of Criminal Procedure). The SPT requests confirmation that this right is indeed notified to all detainees by the judge. 55.With regard to legal aid, the SPT notes that there are no provisions for free legal aid in Beninese law. The SPT recommends that Benin guarantees access to legal assistance to persons without sufficient resources . III.Situation of persons deprived of their liberty A.In gendarmeries and police facilities 56.The police, under the Ministry of Interior, have primary responsibility for enforcing law and maintaining order in urban areas. The gendarmerie, under the Ministry of Defence, performs the same function in rural areas. The delegation was informed that, in times of peace, in essence the police and the gendarmerie perform the same judicial police functions. The delegation observed that, in practice, both the police and the gendarmerie deprived persons of their liberty during the initial investigation phase. 1.Initial custody period 57.The SPT has referred already (see paragraph 0 above) to the constitutional time limit of 48 hours before presentation of a detained person before a magistrate, the legal provisions for prolongation of initial custody for a maximum of 48 hours by the prosecutor (total 96 hours) and, exceptionally, for up to 8 days. These are in principle important safeguards against ill-treatment. 58.The actual practice diverged from the provisions in law. For example, the delegation met with persons who had been taken into custody on a Friday and remained until Monday without being presented before a court. The delegation spoke with staff at police and gendarme establishments who confirmed this situation and explained that the delay beyond the legal time limit was due to the days and times on which courts operated. 59.Production before a court within a time limited period in law after deprivation of liberty is one of the fundamental safeguards for persons deprived of liberty. The SPT recommends that the provision in law of a maximum of 48 hours in initial custody before presentation before a court must be matched by a system of court sessions enabling this legal time limit to be respected in practice. 60.At the Gendarmerie Territoriale de Godomey, officers reported that a prolongation of initial custody might be ordered for 24 hours, if the case were nearly ready; they confirmed that prolongation could be for up to 48 hours, but stated that persons held in initial custody were usually transferred from the gendarmerie after a total period of between 48 and 72 hours. It was not possible to