during the period of the enable victims of torture compensation: whether the armed and security forces expressly prohibited acts report; what legal provisions were applicable to to obtain compensation, in particular “moral” instructions given with regard to the actions of the had been obeyed in practice, and whether they of torture. 635. Questions were also raised about the disappearance of 353 Kurds in 1988 and about the torture and degrading treatment inflicted on Xuwaiti citieens during the Iraqi occupation. In particular, members asked whether Iraq had made provision for any investigations, remedies and compensation in that connection; whether Iraqi prisons were still holding political prisoners; whether the list of all persons currently detained in Iraq would be made public; whether the organieations concerned would have access to court files; and whether detainees could be questioned and examined by physicians. August 636. It was pointed out that, during the Committee’s consideration of the second periodic report of Iraq, doubts had been expressed as to the soundness of certain provisions included in a list of directive6 for the security service, and the question had been asked whether those directive6 were still in force. Members of the Committee also referred to the four judgements concerning acts of torture mentioned in the third periodic report of Iraq and to detailed information on the practice of torture in Iraq furnished by the Special Rapporteur on Torture of the Commission on HumanRights, by Amnesty International and by other international organisations. Such allegations could not be refuted by the Iraqi authorities; the members asked whether all the complaints concerning acts of torture had really been investigated and, if so, with what results. They also asked how many Iraqi soldiers had been tried for rape during the occupation of Kuwait; whether Iraq applied the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners; whether representatives of governmental and non-governmental organieations had been permitted to visit detention centres: and whether any persons had died following torture. They also asked what specific measures h;,d been taken to prevent maltreatment in places of detention; whether Iraqi legislation included any provision’enablfng the State to take action ex officio . in cases of torture: and whether the Iraqi Government would be prepared to conduct impartial investigations with the assistance of international experts, 637. In his reply, the representative of the State party referred to the provisions of the rraqi Constitution and Penal Code designed to prohibit and punish any act of torture and to the Criminal and civil procedures laid down to enable victims of torture to claim moral or material compensation. Investigations were conducted by the courts , which received complaints of torture and which took the necessery steps within their competence against the offenders. The Attorney-General played an essential role: it was his responsibility to institute proceedings on any information he received concerning acts of torture and to follow up the matter until judgement was passed. There were no special rule6 for the investigation of acts of torturel the procedure was that followed for all other offences, whether committed by police or by prison staff, 638. In addition, directive No. 4 of 1988 required the Department of Public Prosecution to investigate prison conditions in order to verify that they conformed to the regulations. The Department’s representative saw to it that physicians visited detention centres. He received complaints from detainees, -154”