CCPR/C/115/D/2214/2012 3.2 The author maintains that the State party has failed to respect article 9 of the Covenant in that: (a) he was subjected to arbitrary detention inasmuch as the arrest was effected without a warrant; (b) he was not informed of the reasons for his arrest; (c) he was not brought before a judge during the time he was detained; (d) he was not able to bring proceedings before a court to decide on the lawfulness of the detention; and (e) he has not received any reparation as the State party’s refusal to conduct a criminal inquiry has deprived him of his right to compensation under article 9, paragraph 5, of the Covenant. 3.3 The author also maintains that there was a violation of articles 7 and 9, read in conjunction with article 2, paragraph 2, since the State party did not take the necessary steps to prevent the acts from occurring. Specifically, it could have taken steps to educate civilian and military personnel, to monitor compliance with interrogation methods and rules, and to improve conditions of detention. 3.4 The author also considers that articles 7 and 9, read in conjunction with article 2, paragraph 3, were violated because of the lack of an effective remedy against those violations. Three years went by between the occurrence of the events and the submission of the communication to the Committee without any form of prompt and rapid inquiry being conducted. 3.5 The author further maintains that the conditions of his detention constitute a separate violation of article 10, paragraph 1, of the Covenant. He was held in the ANR detention centre in conditions that were deplorable: the first cell measured no more than 3 metres by 4, was permeated by a nauseating stench and had a tiny window that barely let in any light; agents were able to observe him through a mesh door. H e was subsequently taken to a cell measuring 3 square metres, which also had an unbearable smell and had no windows at all. The author and another prisoner slept on a concrete floor and were given a bucket to use as a toilet. Twice they were placed in cell s that were even smaller. The author was given no food or water during the first two days of his detention. He was allowed no access to medical care despite the torture he had been subjected to, except on the last day of his detention when the pain was so intense that one of the agents suggested that he should be given some treatment. 3.6 The author was held in incommunicado detention by ANR agents between 11 and 18 December 2008. He was thereby prevented from exercising the rights set out in the Covenant and in the Congolese Constitution, namely the right to be brought promptly before a judge, the right to seek remedy before a court to decide on the lawfulness of his detention and the right to communicate with his family and with legal counsel. The foregoing was a direct consequence of the State’s conduct, which should be interpreted as a denial of recognition of the author as a person before the law, in violation of article 16 of the Covenant. 3.7 The author maintains that the State party has not met its ob ligations under article 17 in that it arbitrarily and unlawfully interfered with the author ’s privacy, family and home, and that agents of the State are responsible for the attacks on his honour and reputation. The author was arrested at his home without a warrant and was subjected to acts of violence in the presence of one of his daughters. After the author escaped from the State party’s territory, his home remained under close surveillance and his wife was subjected to acts of intimidation. On several occ asions, ANR agents went to the home to try to find out from her the whereabouts of her husband. This was reported to the United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which gave the author ’s wife a hotline number that she could call in case of serious danger. She was prohibited by ANR from leaving the country to attend a funeral in Brazzaville. In addition, the author considers that the photograph taken of him by a guard during his detention and that was subsequently circulate d in the media GE.15-22873 7/17