CAT/C/41/D/291/2006 page 12 up on the complainant’s complaint, and by not proceeding with any kind of public investigation, the State party deprived her of the most basic and most important form of redress, in violation of article 14. 3.15 According to the complainant, with regard to compensation, even if this constituted sufficient redress for victims of torture, she was denied access to it. The civil actions theoretically available to her were in practice inaccessible. Tunisian law permits the complainant to undertake a civil action where no criminal proceedings have been initiated, but the complainant must waive the right to pursue any criminal proceedings (Code of Criminal Procedure, art. 7). Even supposing that the complainant could win the case without the benefit of criminal proceedings, this limited form of redress would be neither fair nor adequate. If the State party was permitted to provide purely financial compensation to the complainant or other victims of torture and thereby claim to have fulfilled its obligations in this respect, that would amount to accepting that the State party is entitled to evade its responsibility in exchange for a certain sum of money. The complainant has not received the means for her rehabilitation, while the abuse inflicted on her has left deep psychological scars. Nor has she been able to obtain compensation for the property taken from her during her detention. In the light of all these points, the State party has deprived the complainant of fair and adequate compensation or redress of any kind, in violation of article 14, taken either on its own or in conjunction with article 16, paragraph 1.26 3.16 The complainant considers that, with regard to the alleged violation of article 16, the serious abuse inflicted on her was tantamount to torture. If, however, this interpretation is not accepted, it is maintained that such treatment constituted cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment within the meaning of article 16. 3.17 In conclusion, the complainant asks the Committee to recommend that the State party take the necessary measures to conduct a full investigation into the circumstances surrounding the torture in her case, to communicate the outcome of the investigation to her and to take appropriate measures to bring those responsible to justice. She also asks the Committee to recommend that the State party take the necessary measures to ensure that she receives adequate and full redress for the harm suffered, including the cost of the medical care needed for her rehabilitation and the value of the property taken from her. State party’s observations on admissibility and complainant’s comments 4. On 12 December 2006, the State party informed the Committee that the complaint in question, registered as case No. 5873/4, was the subject of a judicial investigation at the Tunis court of first instance. The investigation is taking its course. 26 Counsel refers to communication No. 161/2000, in which the Committee considered that, even though article 16, paragraph 1, makes no mention of article 14 of the Convention, the State party nevertheless has an obligation to grant redress and fair and adequate compensation to the victim of an act in breach of article 16 of the Convention (Herrera v. Colombia, Views adopted on 2 November 1987, para. 9.6).