CCPR/C/112/D/1972/2010 vitamins and below the nationally established standards. The author refers to the report of the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in 2000 (E/CN.4/2001/66/Add.1), which notes that no recreational or educational activities were available in the Qobustan prison (ibid., para. 55), and to the 2003 recommendation of the Committee against Torture to the Government to review the treatment of prisoners serving life sentences (CAT/C/CR/30/1, para. 7 (l), and Corr.1). He further refers to the concluding observations of the Committee against Torture of 2009 (CAT/C/AZE/CO/3), which state that it “regrets the lack of information provided with regard to the mechanism or legal provision through which detainees may request a medical examination by an independent doctor, and remains concerned at allegations that access to medical care is frequently denied” (ibid., para. 11). He also refers to a number of reports of governmental and non-governmental organizations expressing concern regarding the prison conditions in Azerbaijan.5 2.9 From 1991 until 2000, the author had no possibility of appealing the judgement of the Baku City Court. On 1 September 2000, with the abolition of the old criminal codes, reconsideration of final judgements became possible. After several exchanges of correspondence with the judiciary, the author was able on 5 June 2005 to lodge a cassation appeal. The case was examined on 20 September 2005 by a panel of judges of the Supreme Court, which rejected his appeal and confirmed the 12 November 1991 verdict. On 24 October 2005, the Plenum of the Supreme Court reviewed the 20 September 2005 decision and confirmed the 1991 verdict, replacing the death penalty with life imprisonment, based on the 10 February 1998 law. The author was not present during those proceedings and his lawyer was only allowed to participate in the 20 September 2005 hearing before the panel of Supreme Court judges. He maintains that the above violated the equality of arms principle, because the prosecutor participated in the 24 October 2005 hearing, but the author was not notified of the hearing. 2.10 On 8 August 2005, the author filed an appeal before the Qaradag District Court claiming that the imposition of life imprisonment instead of the death sentence contradicts article 11 (para. 2) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 7 (para. 1) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and provisions of the domestic Codes of Criminal Procedure of 1960 and 2000. On 24 October 2005 (the same date as the decision of the Supreme Court), the Qaradag District Court reviewed the author’s appeal, comparing the penalties provided for under the 1960 Code and the 2000 Code. The Court reduced the penalties for some of the crimes, since under the 5 The author refers to: Council of Europe, “Council of Europe Anti-Torture Committee visits Azerbaijan”, news flash, 6 December 2006 (available from www.cpt.coe.int/documents/aze/2006-1206-eng.htm); International Federation of Human Rights and Human Rights Center Azerbaijan, “Après l’abolition de la peine capitale, les condamnés à perpétuité en danger de mort. Torture et mauvais traitements dans les prisons d’Azerbaïdjan” (report of the field mission, available in French from www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/Az465fr.pdf); Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, Committee on the Honouring of Obligations and Commitments by Member States of the Council of Europe (Monitoring Committee), “Honouring of obligations and commitments by Azerbaijan”, report of 30 March 2007, document 11226, , paras. 188 and 189 (available from http://assembly.coe.int/ASP/Doc/XrefViewHTML.asp?FileID=11649&Language=en); the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, resolution 1545 (2007) on honouring of obligations and commitments by Azerbaijan (available from http://assembly.coe.int/Main.asp?link=/Documents/AdoptedText/ta07/ERES1545.htm); and Penal Reform International, Life Imprisonment and Conditions of Serving the Sentence in the South Caucasus Countries (2009), pp. 55–62 (available from www.penalreform.org/wpcontent/uploads/2013/05/South-Caucasus-Research-Report-Death-Penalty-and-AlternativesENGLISH.pdf). 5