CAT/C/LKA/CO/3-4 perpetrators do not influence protection mechanisms and that they are held accountable. Internally displaced persons 20. The Committee notes that near the end of the armed conflict in 2009 over 280,000 people fled from the northern LTTE-controlled areas to government-controlled territory in Vavuniya, Mannar, Jaffna and Trincomalee districts, where the vast majority of them entered closed military-run internment camps. While noting the information provided by the State party regarding the substantial efforts undertaken to respond to the influx of displaced persons, the Committee remains concerned at the situation of IDPs in the country, especially those who remain in “welfare centres”. According to the State party, IDPs were initially provided with “a secure environment and cared for while they were screened to identify terrorist cadre[s] who had infiltrated the civilian population that was rescued at the conclusion of the armed conflict”. The Committee, however, remains concerned about consistent allegations of torture and ill-treatment during questioning of camp residents by the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) and the Terrorist Investigation Department (TID). The Committee is concerned that these allegations have not been investigated outside the context of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) process and that no judicial action has been taken. The Committee is also concerned at reports of massive overcrowding, poor hygienic and sanitary conditions, malnutrition, inadequate medical and psychological assistance and lack of freedom of movement for camp residents during and after the final stages of the war (art. 2, 11 and 16). The State party should: (a) Adopt the necessary measures to guarantee the physical integrity and address the specific needs of internally displaced persons, in accordance with the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2), including the medical care and psychological attention they require; (b) Ensure that investigations are carried out into the alleged cases of torture, including sexual violence, against camp residents and that perpetrators of such acts are brought before the courts; (c) Provide mandatory in-service training programmes on human rights, internal displacement and gender-based violence for members of the military and lawenforcement officials serving in the camps; Accountability process and the Lessons Learnt Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) 21. The Committee notes that there have been a number of ad hoc commissions of inquiry looking into past human rights violations, including the Presidential Commission of Inquiry to investigate serious cases of human rights violations that occurred since 1 August 2005, which according to the International Independent Group of Eminent Persons (IIGEP) did not meet international standards of independence, witness and victim protection and transparency. The Committee notes the information on the mandate, composition and working methods of the Lessons Learnt Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) and the InterAgency Advisory Committee (IAAC), established in May and September 2010, respectively. The Committee notes the assurances by the delegation of the State party that the LLRC has the faculty to channel the complaints received “with a possibility of immediate investigation and remedial action”, and that the Attorney General is “empowered to institute criminal proceedings based on the material collected during the course of the recommendations made by the LLRC”. The Committee, nevertheless, regrets the apparent limited mandate of the LLRC and its alleged lack of independence. In addition, it regrets the lack of information provided by the State party on the investigations undertaken into allegations of serious violations of international human rights law, such as 9