18(3) discussed above. Suffice to say that the Respondent State has failed to conduct an effective investigation into the alleged acts of inhuman and degrading treatment and no diligent attempts have been made to hold anyone accountable. 207. The African Commission would also like to accentuate the fact that, being a party to the African Charter, the Respondent State has an obligation to AC HP R prohibit inhuman and degrading treatment under Article 5 of the Charter. Furthermore, since the Respondent State has acceded to the Convention against Torture,73 it has formally accepted the Convention and is therefore bound by it. Even though Article 13 of the Convention Against Torture does not specifically mention inhuman and degrading treatment, it provides that “…... Steps shall be taken to ensure that the complainant and witnesses are protected against all ill-treatment or intimidation as a consequence of his complaint or any evidence given.” 208. The African Commission notes that the Respondent State is also a party to the ICCPR,74 whose Article 7 provides that, “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” The Victims in the present Communication were not only subjected to illtreatment, but intimidated to withdraw their Complaints. The Respondent State therefore owed an obligation to the Victims to effectively investigate the acts of ill-treatment that impacted on their dignity and punish the perpetrators accordingly. Failing to do so only amounted to an infringement of the rights of the Victims under Article 5 of the Africa 73 The Respondent State Acceded to the Convention on 25 June 1986. 74 The Respondent State Egypt ratified the ICCPR on 14 January 1982. 60