CAT/C/52/D/503/2012 failings of the State party’s judicial system perpetuate this climate of impunity, and the judiciary’s dependence on the executive, a matter raised by the Committee,10 is a major obstacle to the prompt initiation of impartial investigations when there are substantial grounds to believe that an act of torture has been committed. In conclusion, the complainant states that he cannot be expected to attempt to take legal recourse against the inaction of the judicial authorities, as any such attempt would be doomed to failure. As a consequence, he requests the Committee to conclude that he attempted to invoke the available domestic remedies but that they proved ineffective. Alternatively, he requests the Committee to conclude that the application of the remedies was unreasonably prolonged, since no investigation had been opened 18 months after the events, which had been reported as soon as they had occurred.11 The complaint 3.1 The complainant claims he was the victim of violations by the State party of article 2, paragraph 1, and articles 11, 12, 13 and 14, read in conjunction with article 1, and, alternatively, with article 16 of the Convention. 3.2 According to the complainant, the abuse to which he was subjected caused him intense pain and suffering and constitutes acts of torture12 as defined in article 1 of the Convention. He was first slapped twice by the mayor of Bujumbura and then brutally beaten by the municipal police commissioner and the police officers accompanying him. While he was on the ground, the police officers kicked him and hit him with the butts of their rifles all over his body, including his back, which caused bleeding and extreme pain. In the police vehicle in which he was transported, the complainant continued to be hit all over his body, which caused him to lose consciousness. The mayor encouraged his men to continue the beating, even asking them to “finish him off”, thereby leaving no doubt as to his intentions. These words were extraordinarily demeaning and led him to believe that he would not survive the beating, thereby causing him extreme mental anguish. 3.3 Again with reference to article 1 of the Convention, the complainant states that he was also denied the right to see a physician on the first day of his detention; that he was left handcuffed for 32 hours; and that he was in hospital for one month and four days following the abuse and again for a month in April 2011 in order to undergo surgery on his left leg. In his view, these facts demonstrate the intensity of his pain and suffering, which required several months of medical treatment. 3.4 The complainant adds that this suffering was inflicted on him deliberately. The mayor’s orders and the relentlessness by his henchmen clearly demonstrate that this was a deliberate act intended to inflict severe pain. The complainant also draws attention to the wilful refusal to provide him with any treatment during his first hours of detention, as well as his arbitrary detention for four days, which in his view was intended as punishment for having questioned the mayor of Bujumbura about payment of a security deposit for the medical treatment of the two injured men brought to the emergency room. The beating he received was also intended to intimidate him and to make him stop asking questions about the deposit. The complainant adds that he was not placed under arrest and that the police were at no time attempting to arrest him. He was taken to the premises of the criminal 10 11 12 6 Ibid., para. 12. The complainant also refers to the report of the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in Burundi (A/HRC/17/50), para. 59. The complainant refers to communication No. 8/1991, Halimi-Nedzibi v. Austria, decision adopted on 18 November 1993, para. 6.2. The complainant refers to communication No. 207/2002, Dimitrijevic v. Serbia and Montenegro, decision adopted on 24 November 2004, para. 5.3. GE.14-04314