CCPR/C/120/D/2173/2012 is “inaccessible to the victim’s close relatives”,22 the investigation itself cannot be regarded as an effective one that is “capable of leading to the identification and punishment of those responsible for the events in question”.23 Noting the failure of the State party to explain the necessity of keeping information from the author and the fact that no practical outcomes of the investigation are known, especially given the duration of the investigation, the Committee concludes that the State party has not justified its refusal to provide relevant information to the author. In the light of those circumstances and the unexplained suspensions of the investigation, the Committee concludes that the State party failed to launch a prompt, impartial and effective investigation into the circumstances of the death of the author’s son and his allegations of torture and ill-treatment. As such, the State party has not provided an effective remedy, in violation of their rights under article 2 (3), read in conjunction with articles 6 (1) and 7. 9.7 The Committee observes that, although over seven years have elapsed since the death of the author’s son, the author still does not know the exact circumstances surrounding it, and the State party’s authorities have not indicted, prosecuted or brought anyone to justice in connection with this custodial death that occurred in highly suspicious circumstances. The Committee understands the continued anguish and mental stress caused to the author — the father of the deceased detainee — by this persisting uncertainty, which is amplified by the State party’s refusal to provide any information about the investigation. In its view, that amounts to inhuman treatment of the author, in violation of article 7 of the Covenant. 10. The Committee, acting under article 5 (4) of the Optional Protocol, is of the view that the facts before it discloses a violation by the State party of Ismonboy Boboev’s rights under articles 6 (1) and 7, separately and in conjunction with article 2 (3), and of the author’s rights under article 7, separately and in conjunction with article 2 (3) of the Covenant. 11. Pursuant to article 2 (3) (a) of the Covenant, the State party is under an obligation to provide individuals whose Covenant rights have been violated with an effective remedy, in the form of full reparation. Accordingly, the State party is obligated to, inter alia, take appropriate steps to: (a) conduct a prompt and impartial investigation into torture and the death of Ismonboy Boboev, and to prosecute and punish those responsible; (b) keep the author informed at all times about the progress of the investigation; and (c) provide the author with compensation for the loss of his son’s life, for the torture that his son suffered, and for the pain and anguish that he, himself, suffered as a result of his son’s death. The State party is also under an obligation to take all steps necessary to prevent similar violations from occurring in the future. 12. Bearing in mind that, by becoming a party to the Optional Protocol, the State party has recognized the competence of the Committee to determine whether there has been a violation of the Covenant and that, pursuant to article 2 of the Covenant, the State party has undertaken to ensure to all individuals within its territory or subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognized in the Covenant and to provide an effective remedy when it has been determined that a violation has occurred, the Committee wishes to receive from the State party, within 180 days, information about the measures taken to give effect to the present Views. The State party is also requested to publish the present Views and to disseminate them widely in the official languages of the State party. 22 23 8 European Court of Human Rights, Oğur v. Turkey (application No. 21594/93), judgment of 20 May 1999, para. 92. Ibid., para. 93.