In one state in Eastern Europe, despite being tasked with investigating allegations of torture, the Prosecutor’s Office does not have sufficient powers to require police officers to comply with investigations. As a result, police authorities end up conducting investigations into allegations involving fellow police officers in the majority of cases, thus severely compromising the independence and impartiality of the investigations.208 In another OSCE participating State in Central Asia, the incentives to rely on torture-tainted evidence compromises prosecutors’ decisions as to whether to launch investigations in the first place, often leading to a decision not to launch investigations because of the perceived conflict with the ongoing criminal case against the alleged victim.209 If an investigation is initiated, domestic law allows prosecutors to delegate the investigation to the police authorities, meaning that police are effectively collecting evidence against colleagues, or potentially even themselves, for the investigation. Furthermore, prosecutors and police officers from the same regions often have close professional and, sometimes, personal ties, further endangering impartiality.210 94. Concerns over political influence and lack of independence of prosecutor’s offices were also raised in two other OSCE participating States surveyed for this report. In one of them, there is a specific law regulating investigations and trials of public officials that requires prosecutors to obtain permission from the authorities to launch investigations into public officials.211 Although investigations into allegations of torture or other ill-treatment have been excluded by a paragraph added to Article 2 of the relevant law in 2003,212 in practice, prosecutors still request permission to launch such investigations, and these requests are generally rejected.213 95. In another OSCE participating State in the South Caucasus, investigations are carried out by the Special Investigations Service, which is considered structurally independent. Nevertheless, considering that only four cases of torture have reached courts, resulting in no convictions, the effectiveness of this Service may be questioned.214 In another case in Central Asia, investigations are conducted by national security agencies, which lack transparency and cases simply tend not to be investigated.215 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 58 Questionnaire response Belgrade Human Rights Centre (Serbia) (2019). Questionnaire response Nota Bene (Tajikistan) (2019). Ibid. Questionnaire response Human Rights Association (Turkey) (2019) Citing Law No 4483 on the Prosecution of Civil Servants and other Public Employees from 5 December 1999. Ibid.; In the paragraph added to Article 2 of the Law no. 4483 in 2003, it is stipulated that authorization for investigation shall not be sought for investigations and proceedings to be initiated into the offences of torture and that the investigation shall be directly carried out. Ibid. Questionnaire response Armenia Helsinki Association (2019). Questionnaire response Golos Svobody (Kyrgyzstan) (2019).