CAT/C/65/D/778/2016 complaint is sufficiently substantiated for the purposes of admissibility with respect to a violation of the complainants’ rights guaranteed by articles 2, 11, 12, 13 and 14 of the Convention. Accordingly, the Committee finds the complaint admissible and proceeds to its consideration on the merits. Consideration on the merits 7.1 The Committee has examined the complaint in the light of all the information submitted to it by the parties, in accordance with article 22 (4) of the Convention. 7.2 Before considering the allegations made by the complainants, the Committee must determine whether the acts to which Mr. Yrusta was subjected constitute acts of torture within the meaning of article 1 of the Convention. In this connection, the Committee takes note of the complainants’ allegations concerning the acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment suffered by Mr. Yrusta in prisons in the provinces of Córdoba and Santa Fe. According to the complainants, Mr. Yrusta’s transfer to the Coronda Prison Facility in Santa Fe was in retaliation for complaints he had made against members of the Córdoba Prison Service, and the ill-treatment and torture inflicted on him intensified after his complaints were made public in a television programme. The acts of torture reported by Mr. Yrusta, and which were the subject of complaints and allegations by the complainants, include long periods in buzones, or punishment cells, the use of the dry submarine treatment, beatings, threats, transfers and being shackled to a bed. The Committee notes that Mr. Yrusta spent more than 20 days, between 16 January 2013 and the date of his death, 7 February 2013, in an isolation cell, without contact with other detainees in Córdoba prison, and that, according to various statements in the case file, Mr. Yrusta was stripped naked and rubber bullets were fired at him as part of disciplinary measures ordered by the prison authorities in the days prior to his death. The Committee also takes note of the State party’s claims regarding the absence of any complaints of torture or other ill-treatment by Mr. Yrusta while he was serving his custodial sentence in Bouwer prison in the Province of Córdoba. However, the Committee notes that the State party has provided no information indicating that the failure to file a complaint could be interpreted as sufficient to conclude that the alleged acts of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment did not take place. The Committee further considers that the allegations made by the complainants could, in the alternative, relate to acts constituting cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment within the meaning of article 16 of the Convention. 7.3 As for the complainants’ claims under articles 2 and 11 of the Convention, the Committee recalls that, at the time of the events that gave rise to the present complaint, Mr. Yrusta was serving a custodial sentence. In such a situation, the Committee emphasizes that States parties bear a special responsibility to safeguard the rights of persons deprived of their liberty owing to the extent of the control that prison authorities exercise over such persons. 7 Therefore, States parties are under a special obligation to ensure that persons deprived of their liberty can exercise the rights enshrined in the Convention and to take effective measures to ensure, inter alia, that the deprivation of liberty will not at any time become secret detention or an enforced disappearance or facilitate the commission of acts of torture or other ill-treatment against persons deprived of their liberty. In this regard, the Committee notes that according to the complainants, Mr. Yrusta was transferred to Santa Fe, while under the impression that he was being transferred to the Province of Santiago del Estero, as he had requested, in order to be nearer to his family. The Committee notes that no agent of the State party provided any information whatsoever to the representatives or family members of Mr. Yrusta, or to himself, regarding his transfer, especially in view of the fact that the prison authorities were unsure as to Mr. Yrusta’s identity. It also notes that Mr. Yrusta was held in isolation, unable to communicate with any of the other detainees for more than 20 days. Furthermore, the fact that Mr. Yrusta was forcibly disappeared for more than a week means that the allegations of possible acts of torture or other ill-treatment 7 10 Committee against Torture, Guerrero Larez v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (CAT/C/54/D/456/2011), para. 6.4. GE.19-01524