CAT/C/KGZ/CO/2 Independence of the judiciary 12. While noting the State party’s efforts to guarantee the independence of judges, the Committee remains concerned at the reported lack of independence of the judiciary, in particular the process of selecting judges, the attestation procedure for judges, and the requirement for re-evaluation every seven years, as well as the low level of salaries and the uncertain tenure of judges, which may lead to corruption. It is also deeply concerned at reports that corruption in the judiciary significantly contributes to a climate of impunity (art. 2). The State party should strengthen the independence and impartiality of the judiciary for the performance of its duties in accordance with international standards, notably the Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, inter alia by guaranteeing judges’ security of tenure. The State party should implement the recommendations regarding Kyrgyzstan made by the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers (E/CN.4/2006/52/Add.3). Coerced confessions 13. The Committee is seriously concerned at numerous, consistent and credible reports that the use of forced confessions as evidence in courts is widespread. While noting that the use of evidence obtained through unlawful means is prohibited by law, it is deeply concerned that in practice there is a heavy reliance on confessions within the criminal justice system. The Committee is further concerned at reports that judges have frequently declined to act on allegations made by criminal defendants in court, or to allow the introduction into evidence of independent medical reports that would tend to confirm the defendant’s claims of torture for the purpose of obtaining a confession. The Committee regrets the lack of information provided by the State party on cases in which judges or prosecutors have initiated investigations into torture claims raised by criminal defendants in court, and is alarmed that no official has been prosecuted and punished for torture even in the single case brought to its attention in which a conviction obtained by torture was excluded from evidence by a court – that of Farrukh Gapiurov, who was acquitted by the Osh Municipal Court of involvement in the June 2010 violence (arts. 2 and 15). The Committee urges the State party to: (a) Adopt legislation explicitly prohibiting the use of evidence obtained through torture, in line with article 15 of the Convention, and ensure its implementation; (b) Ensure that judges and prosecutors initiate investigations and take other appropriate remedial measures ex officio whenever a criminal defendant or his or her lawyer presents reasonable grounds to believe that a confession has been obtained through torture or ill-treatment, and ensure that the perpetrators of such abuses are prosecuted and, upon conviction, punished, including in the case of Farrukh Gapiurov; (c) Ensure that the findings of independent forensic medical examinations of criminal defendants who allege that they were tortured are considered admissible as evidence in court proceedings and given evidentiary weight equivalent to that given to the reports of State-employed medical professionals, where appropriate. National human rights institution 14. The Committee is concerned that the organization and the prerogatives of the Office of the Ombudsman do not comply with the principles relating to the status of national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights (Paris Principles), especially 6