continued or occurred after 23 Marcii 1976 (the date on which the Covenant and the Optional Protocol entered into force for Uruguay), disclose, for the reasons set out above (para. 15) violations of the International Cov­ enant on Civil and Political Rights, with respect to both Alcides Lanza Perdomo and Beatriz Weismann de Lanza, in particular of: Article 7 and article 10 (1), because of the treatment which they received during their detention; Article 9 (1), because they were not released, in the case of Alcides Lanza Perdomo, for five months and, in the case of Beatriz Weismann de Lanza, for 10 months, after their sentences of imprisonment had been fully served. Article 9 (3), because upon their arrest they were not brought promptly before a judicial officer and because they were not brought to trial within a reasonable time; Article 9 (4), because they were unable effectively to challenge their arrest and detention; Article 14 (1), (2) and (3), because they had no effective access to legal assistance, they were not brought to trial within a reasonable time, and further because they were tried in circumstances in which irrespective of the legislative provisions they could not effectively enjoy the safeguards of fair trial; Article 19 of the Covenant provides that everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference and that the freedom of expression set forth in paragraph 2 of that article shall be subject only to such restrictions as are necessary (a) for respect of the rights and reputa­ tions of others and (b) for the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals. The Government of Uruguay has sub­ mitted no evidence regarding the nature of the political activities in which Beatriz Weismann and Alcides Lanza were alleged to have been engaged and which led to their arrest, detention and trial. Information that they were charged with subversive association is not in itself suffi­ cient. The Committee is therefore unable to conclude on the information before it that the arrest, detention and trial of Beatriz Weismann and Alcides Lanza were justified on any of the grounds mentioned in article 19 (3) of the Covenant. 17. Accordingly, while the Committee notes with satisfaction that Beatriz Weismann and Alcides Lanza have now been released, it is nevertheless of the view that the State party is under an obligation to provide them with effective remedies, including compensation, for the violations which they have suffered and to take steps to ensure that similar violations do not occur in the future. TENTH SESSION Communication No. 4/1977 Submitted by: William Torres Ramirez on 13 February 1977 Alleged victim: The author State party: Uruguay Date of adoption of views: 23 July 1980 (tenth session) Submission to ÏACHR—Same matter—Exhaustion of domestic remedies—Burden of proof—Access to counsel—Habeus corpus—Torture—Continued detention despite release order—Extension of time for submission of State party's observations—Review of admissibility decision—State's duty to in­ vestigate—Derogation from Covenant civilian clothes and that he was brought to the "Batallón de Infantería No. 13", also called "La Má­ quina". He describes various forms of torture to which detainees were allegedly subjected and, in particular, in his own case the use of submarino (suffocation in water), plantón (he was forced to remain standing for four days), hanging (by his arms, which were tied together, for about 36 hours) and blows (on one occa­ sion he was allegedly beaten with such brutality that he had to be transferred to the military hospital). After be­ ing detained for almost one month, he was forced to sign a written declaration stating that he had not been mistreated during his detention and he had to answer a questionnaire about his activities as member of the Communist Party. On 31 December 1975, he was transferred to the "Regimiento de Artillería No. 1" in La Paloma, Cezzo. He states that the conditions of detention there were, to begin with, a little bit better than in "La Máquina", but after February 1976 they worsened. He alleges that detainees were continuously kept blindfolded, that they were subjected to ill- Articles of Covenant: 4, 7, 9 (1) and (4), 10 (1) and 14(3) Articles of Optional Protocol: 4 (2), and 5 (2) (a) and{b) Views under article 5 (4) of the Optional Protocol 1. The author of this communication (initial letter dated 13 February 1977 and further letters dated 22 October 1977, 5 April 1978 and 20 May 1978) is a Uruguayan national, residing in Mexico. He submitted the communication on his own behalf. 2. The author claims that on 6 December 1975 he was arrested in his house in Montevideo by four men in 49