&£ violence allegedly committed against prisoners were covered by the law of secrecy. Lastly, members expressed concern over the length of criminal or disciplinary proceedings in cases involving presumed violence. 323. With regard to article 14 of the Convention, members of the Committee requested clarifications on the conditions in which the victim of an act of torture could obtain redress, particularly when the offender was a public official. In particUlar, it was found regrettable that Italian legislation did not provide for a general system of compensation by the State for victims of offences but only an obligation of redress limited to the individual responsible for the offence. It was emphasized that such a state of affairs was generally prejudicial to possible victims of torture who, very often, were not able to identify their torturers or to bring legal proceedings. It was also asked whether rehabilitation programmes for victims had been established. 324. With regard to article 15 of the Convention, members of the Committee asked whether a statement obtained through torture could be adduced as evidence in proceedings. 325. Lastly, members of the Committee welcomed the undertaking by the Italian authorities to publish the report prepared by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture following its recent visit to Italy. 326. In his reply, the representative of the State party stated that conformity with the provisions of international human rights instruments was assured by adherence to the principle that such obligations prevailed over domestic law. Meeting obligations under such instruments was the responsibility of the Interministerial Committee for Human Rights. There was no Office of an ombudsman in Italy but a similar service was provided by a special section of the Criminal Court called the Freedom Court, whose magistrates were empowered to assist in cases where administration was dilatory or neglectful of a citizen's legitimate interests. The Freedom Court was also competent to re-ex~nine, within a period of eight days, any decisions which restricted individual freedom. He added that appointment, transfer and disciplinary matters concerning jUdges were supervised by the Higher Council of Magistrature whose independence was enshrined in the Constitution and which was chaired by the President of the Republic. 327. With reference to the allegations of ill-treatment reported by the press and non-governmental organizations, the representative admitted that occasional instances of alleged ill-treatment by the police were inevitable. In general, however, members of the police acted with a high sense of responsibility. He briefly described several cases of alleged ill-treatment by the police, in which the jUdges found no ground for prosecution. Regarding the specific case of a person who had recently died in custody, he said that an investigation had been initiated by the Government Procurator's Office within two days. Details had, however, not yet been released since the matter was sub jUdice. In other cases of incidents at prisons, investigations had been initiated by the Government Procurator's Office; one case had been closed and the investigation in another case was not yet completed. The Department of Penal Investigation had also instituted proceedings against two prison officers. 328 rec leg pri ins Pol Inh int eve in suf tor' Act acc( men1 329, saie behe 330. emph and poli carr pers ift 331. that for had! acadl Polic progl 332. expl, 18 me terre enti1 18 me the E repOt hurnar FurU that to ill inspe norma weeks 333. inclu -60Digitized by Dag Hammarskjöld Library