253. In addition, members of the Committee wished to know which civil rights could be lost under article 225 of the Criminal Code, an8 for how long; whether the King’s Prosecutor and the examining magistrate could receive complaints from prisoners during visits to detention centres: whether an individual could have recourse to the King’s Prosecutor or the supervisory commissions on behalf of a relative who was in prison: which authority controlled the Tazmemart detention centre: what wae the general state of health among the prisoners ; whether prisoners were always released as soon as their sentences were over) whether the provision in article 399 of the Moroccan Criminal Code laying down the death penalty for aqyone guilty of “torture or barbarous acts” also applied to officials: whether the Government intended to ratify the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; what the rules were governing interrogation proceduresr what steps the Government had taken to investigate allegations of torture: whether it had adopted any measures to prevent torture in the future; whether a suspect’s lawyer could be present during interrogation; whether the police in Morocco received any human rights trainings whether a confession made by a suspect while in police custody would be sufficient to secure conviction without further prooft what was the maximum period of pre-trial detention: and whether article 231 of the Code of Criminal Procedure implied that the court could admit police reports, and was even required to do so. 254. Replying to the questions on articles 231 and 225 of the Moroccan Criminal Code, the representative said that no examining magistrate in Morocco had ever been known to use violence during the interrogation of an accused person. Moroccan positive law ruled out any form of violence or torture, and any public official, superintendent or officer of the police who resorted to such methods did.so on his own responsibility and would have to answer for it in court. Any confessions obtained by such methods were invalid. Torture and inhuman or degrading treatment on a systematic basis were unknown in Moroccan prisons. There were occasional riots or attacks on prison officers but, even then, the prison authorities never used force systematically. Complaints’ of ill-treatment made by prisoners were submitted to the administrative authorities and, in serious cases, to the Ministry of Justice, and a number of officials had been convicted of such offences. The treatment of prisoners had become much more humane, and ill-treatment as a disciplinary measure had been of Justice was preparing a new law governing abandoned. The Ministry condition8 of detention, which would be fully consistent with the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners. Following the establishment of administrative tribunals, the State itself could now be called to account for its actions, at least under a procedure for financial compensation. 255. The prison population was growing rapidly owing to the rising crime rate, which was partly due to the population explosion and the country’s economic problems. The number of prison establishments was inadequate, and their total capacity was only 7,000 for a prison population of 37,000. The insanitary prison at Laalou had now been closed and replaced by a more open and spacious prison. All the jails built by the Protectorate authorities had been closed, together with insanitary establishments. In its present economic circumstances, Morocco was not in a position to set about constructing enough prisons to house the prison population in accordance with the Standard Minimum Rules. With regard to a sedret detention centre in Tazmamart, the representative said that since some international human rights organizations -64-