CCPR/C/131/D/2772/2016 provide him with an effective remedy, in violation of article 2 (3), read in conjunction with articles 7 and 10 of the Covenant. 3.5 The author also claims that his right to liberty was violated when officers of the National Intelligence Agency arbitrarily deprived him of his liberty between 17 December 2014 and 14 January 2015. Subsequently, his right to liberty was also violated when he was placed in pretrial detention at Bukavu central prison from 14 January to 6 June 2015 without the conditions established in Congolese law having been met7 since, at the time, the evidence of guilt invoked by the court was based only on D.C.’s statements and on the documents that the author had been forced to sign under torture and ill-treatment without his having been allowed to read them. The author therefore submits that his detention had no legal basis, was not accompanied by procedural guarantees and was therefore arbitrary from the outset. Lastly, the author’s right to liberty was violated on 15 July 2015 when, once again, he was arrested without a warrant and detained for questioning before being released a few hours later. The author also alleges that, for the duration of his detention, the State party violated his right to the procedural guarantees provided for in article 9 of the Covenant, including his right to be informed of the reasons for his arrest under article 9 (2); his right to be brought before a judge or competent authority as soon as possible 8 under article 9 (3); and his right to take proceedings before a court under article 9 (4). 9 Lastly, the author’s right to obtain compensation under article 9 (5), and for the purposes of article 2 (3) of the Covenant, has not been respected, and a full investigation into the violations that he suffered in detention has not been initiated. Therefore, the author also claims a violation by the State party of article 2 (3), read in conjunction with article 9 of the Covenant. 3.6 In addition, the author alleges that the State party has failed in its obligation to guarantee him a fair trial, in particular because forced confessions signed under torture at the premises of the National Intelligence Agency were admitted as evidence and used in the legal proceedings against him. The author did not have access to a lawyer for the duration of his detention at the Agency’s premises, including during the questioning and confrontations to which he was subjected, following which he was forced to sign documents that he had not been allowed to read beforehand. On 27 January 2015, during the hearing before the District Court, which was to rule on his pretrial detention, the author was denied legal assistance in flagrant violation of article 30 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Lastly, he was not granted full access to the documents necessary to effectively challenge the charges against him.10 In this regard, the State party failed to comply with its obligations to the author under article 14 (3) (b) and (g) of the Covenant. 3.7 The author states that he has, on numerous occasions, been the victim of unlawful interference in his private life, family and home. On 17 December 2014 and 15 July 2015, the author was arbitrarily and violently arrested by State officers. On both occasions, the arrests took place at his home in the middle of the night. The violations that the author suffered during his detention constituted arbitrary interference in his private life, which 7 8 9 10 6 Under article 28 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, pretrial detention should be used only in exceptional situations and, in all cases, only after the accused has been questioned. In the present case, the author was not heard until 15 January 2015, i.e., after a warrant for his provisional detention had been issued. Furthermore, pursuant to article 28 (3), the author should have been brought before the competent judge so that he or she could rule on the extension of the author’s detention within five days of the issuance of the provisional detention warrant. In the present case, this was done on 27 January 2015, 13 days after the issuance of the provisional detention warrant and without the accused’s having been assisted by his lawyer, in violation of article 30 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The author was not brought before a competent judge until 27 January 2015, i.e., 41 days after his arrest. He was not assisted by a lawyer. During his detention at the premises of the National Intelligence Agency between 17 December 2014 and 14 January 2015, the author could not exercise his right to take proceedings before a court to have the lawfulness of his detention reviewed. In fact, during this period, he was denied the right to be assisted by a lawyer. There has been no follow-up to the criminal complaint submitted by his lawyer on his behalf on 20 December 2014. The author has never been granted access to the documents that he was forced to sign when he was being tortured by H.K. at the premises of the National Intelligence Agency and on the basis of which the District Court ruled that there were serious grounds for finding the author guilty. GE.21-09615