CRPD/C/20/D/38/2016 he received from the security forces and prison authorities amounted to acts of abuse and violence, in violation of article 16 of the Convention. 3.3 The author also considers that, by failing to provide him with the necessary medical treatment to avoid permanent and complete hearing loss, the State party violated his rights under article 25 (b) of the Convention. In that regard, he argues that the State party denied him access to the urgent surgery that he needed despite having caused the injury that resulted in his permanent disability, and despite being aware that failure to treat it urgently would result in permanent and complete hearing loss. 3.4 The author also claims that, by denying him access to a lawyer from his detention in 2012 to the end of 2016, the State party’s authorities interfered with his right to due process, including his right to consult with a legal counsel. He submits that, when his trial started, although he was finally granted access to a lawyer, all his requests to meet him were rejected. The author also submits that no measures were taken to enable him to take part effectively in the proceedings, despite his hearing impairment, and considers that the whole situation amounted to a violation of his rights under article 13 (1) of the Convention, read alone and together with article 4.7 State party’s observations on admissibility 4.1 On 7 December 2016, the State party submitted its observations on the admissibility of the communication, requesting a separate consideration of the admissibility from the merits of the case. The State party acknowledges that the author remains detained at the General Directorate of Investigation, in Al Dammam. 4.2 The State party submits that the communication should be held inadmissible on three grounds. First, it argues that the complaint was not signed by the victim or a member of the victim’s family and therefore does not comply with the requirements of article 2 (b) of the Optional Protocol. In this connection, it argues that “nothing prevents the complainant from submitting a communication himself or from providing a signed authorization for representation to the author of the communication”.8 4.3 The State party then indicates that the same matter is pending before the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers and the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. It considers that the Committee is therefore precluded from pursuing a concurrent investigation. 4.4 The State party finally submits that the author failed to exhaust all available domestic remedies, while “effective means of redress are available for the author” and that the complaint is not supported by any evidence. Author’s comments on the State party’s observations on admissibility 5.1 On 7 March 2017, the author transmitted his comments on the State party’s observations on admissibility. He submits that the arguments of the State party regarding the inadmissibility of his complaint are not valid. 5.2 Regarding the State party’s argument that the author’s complaint should be held inadmissible because the complaint itself was not signed by the author or his family, the author submits that this objection is factually moot because the initial complaint was submitted together with a handwritten power of attorney, in Arabic, clearly signed by “the family of the detainee, Munir al Adam”. 9 The author then recalls that he is detained incommunicado, without the possibility to meet with his lawyer, and that, in such 7 8 9 4 The initial complaint also alleged a violation of article 12 (3) in that regard, but this allegation was later removed. Informal translation of the State party’s observations submitted in Arabic. The initial complaint was indeed accompanied by a handwritten power of attorney signed by members of the author’s family according to the Committee’s secretariat.