Interpretation States Parties are obliged to ensure that any individual who claims to have been subjected to torture or treated or punished in a cruel, inhuman, or degrading way (as in Article 16 §1) has a right to lodge a complaint. All persons have a right to lodge a complaint without any hindrance or discrimination. The individual’s right under Article 13 is two-fold: it consists of the right to lodge a complaint to the competent authorities, and of the right to have the complaint investigated by the authorities promptly and impartially. The form of the complaint is not important. According to the CAT, Article 13 of the Convention does not require either the formal lodging of a complaint of torture under the procedure laid down in national law or an express statement of intent to institute and sustain a criminal action. It is enough for the victim simply to bring the facts to the attention of an authority of the State for the latter to be obliged to consider it as an implied, but unequivocal expression of the victim’s wish that the facts be promptly and impartially investigated.197 A criminal investigation must seek both to determine the nature and circumstances of the alleged acts and to establish the identity of any persons who might have been involved therein. Although forensic medical reports are important as evidence of acts of torture, they are often insufficient and have to be compared with and supplemented by other information.199 States Parties should protect the complainant and prevent any victimisation and reprisals. Authorities should be made sensitive to the consequences of making a complaint and the vulnerable situation of the complainant. States should eliminate the risk of victimisation by ensuring that the complainant is in a safe place, which could include changing the personnel in contact with him or her, moving the individual to a different place, or ensuring the presence of a witness during further interrogations. In case the complainant is a detainee, the individual should be moved to a safer place of detention. States are further required to protect any witnesses that give evidence to the investigation. In the case of Baraket v. Tunisia, the CAT considered that the magistrate, by failing to investigate the complaint of torture more thoroughly, committed a breach of the duty of impartiality imposed on him by his obligation to give equal weight to both accusation and defence during the investigation, as did the public prosecutor when he failed to appeal against the decision to dismiss the case. The minister of justice could also have ordered the public prosecutor to do II. INDIVIDUAL ANALYSIS OF ARTICLES 1–16 OF THE CONVENTION 2. ANALYSIS OF SUBSTANTIVE PROVISIONS A person making such a complaint has a right to have the complaint examined thoroughly and seriously, which means undertaking a formal investigation of the facts. The investigation must take place irrespective of whether the suspect is known or present.198 53