CCPR/C/122/D/2577/2015 who was present during such torture and certain statements made during such torture. Mr. Formonov’s post-conviction torture was also well detailed, including his placement in isolation cells, continual beatings that left him unable to walk for over a week, his placement in unheated cells where the sub-freezing temperatures left him ill, his being strangled by prison authorities and threats of imprisonment of his children. The Committee further notes the author’s assertion that the family was only granted a small number of meetings with Mr. Formonov in order to conceal evidence of his torture. The Committee notes that the State party has provided no documentary evidence of any specific inquiry into the numerous allegations of ill-treatment. The Committee further notes the State party has not provided any explanation as to the reasons for which Mr. Formonov was transferred to other prison facilities during visits to Jasluk by the Red Cross. The Committee considers that, under the circumstances, the State party has failed to demonstrate in a satisfactory manner how its authorities adequately addressed the allegations of torture and ill-treatment made by the authors in any meaningful way. It recalls that the burden of proof in regard to torture or ill-treatment cannot rest alone on the author of a communication, especially in view of the fact that the author and the State party do not always have equal access to the evidence and that frequently the State party alone has access to the relevant information. The State party has the duty 12 to conduct a prompt, effective and independent investigation13 of all credible allegations of violations of article 7 of the Covenant. Under those circumstances, the Committee considers that due weight must be given to the author’s allegations of torture and ill-treatment. Accordingly, the Committee concludes that the facts as presented by the author reveal a violation of Mr. Formonov’s rights under article 7, alone and in conjunction with article 2 (3) of the Covenant. 9.3 Regarding the author’s claims that Mr. Formonov was detained arbitrarily as a result of his human rights activities, in violation of his rights under articles 9 (1) and 19 (2), the Committee notes the author’s submission that Mr. Formonov had been the chair of a human rights organization’s regional branch, that he had monitored trials and had written human rights-related pamphlets. It further notes the State party’s contention that he was arrested on charges of extortion. In that regard, the Committee recalls its jurisprudence that the protection against arbitrary detention is to be applied broadly and that the “arbitrariness” is not to be equated with “against the law”, but must be interpreted more broadly to include elements of inappropriateness, injustice, lack of predictability and due process of law. 14 The Committee also recalls that an arrest or detention as punishment for the legitimate exercise of the rights as guaranteed by the Covenant is arbitrary, including freedom of opinion and expression. 15 The Committee notes the author’s claims that the arrest was aimed at intimidating and silencing Mr. Formonov, targeting his activities as a human rights defender. It also notes the author’s information that his photocopier and all human rightsrelated literature and pamphlets were seized during the search, and the State party’s failure to explain how the confiscated human rights material could be related to the extortion charges. The Committee considers therefore that the author has established that Mr. Formonov was arrested and detained for his human rights work. In the circumstances described by the author, and in the absence of the State party’s explanations regarding these elements of the communication, the Committee considers that there has been a violation of Mr. Formonov’s rights under articles 9 (1) and 19 of the Covenant. 9.4 Regarding article 14 of the Covenant, the Committee notes the author’s claim that Mr. Formonov was kept in a metal cage during the court hearing. The Committee further notes that the State party has accepted this as a fact. The Committee recalls that defendants should not be shackled or kept in cages during trials or otherwise presented to the court in a manner indicating that they may be dangerous criminals. 16 On the basis of the information before it, the Committee concludes that keeping Mr. Formonov in a cage constitutes a 12 13 14 15 16 12 See general comment No. 31 (2004) on the nature of the general legal obligation imposed on States parties to the Covenant, para. 15. See general comment No. 20 (1992) on the prohibition of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 14. See general comment No. 35 (2014) on liberty and security of person, para. 12. Ibid, para. 17, quoting Zelaya Blanco v. Nicaragua (CCPR/C/51/D/328/1988), para. 10.3. See general comment No. 32 (2007) on the right to equality before courts and tribunals and to a fair trial, para. 30.