CAT/OP/UKR/3 identify armed groups’ military positions. The Subcommittee also understands that, in some cases, acts were committed by private individuals or volunteer battalions with the consent or acquiescence of public officials. 36. As it did during its 2011 visit (see CAT/OP/UKR/1, paras. 64 and 93-94), the Subcommittee also received allegations about the ill-treatment of detained persons, including juveniles, by the police during their apprehension and interrogation. Reports of juveniles being punched, kicked, burned and shocked with tasers were borne out by consistent interviews, observation of injuries and registers (even if such records were not always complete). Many detainees stated that, following ill-treatment by the police, they were prevented from entering pretrial detention facilities (SIZOs) because they had visible injuries and had therefore been kept in pretrial centres under the authority of the national police (ITTs) for their “faces to heal” before being registered and undergoing a medical examination at a SIZO. 37. In addition, it appears that prosecutors and judges are not particularly sensitive or sympathetic to complaints of torture and ill-treatment. A number of factors may contribute to this, including the already heavy workloads and limited training of prosecutors, the deference shown to police investigators given prosecutors’ reliance on them for other cases and a tolerance for torture committed by “defenders” (volunteers fighting in eastern Ukraine), stemming from expressions of sympathy for their cause. During its visit, the Subcommittee observed that allegations of torture and ill-treatment were not raised — or were raised belatedly — by defence lawyers who preferred to focus on the criminal charges made against their clients, as it was only for dealing with those charges that the lawyers would be remunerated. In addition, the Subcommittee met many officials, including administrators, law enforcement officers and medical professionals, who did not feel it was their responsibility to report suspected cases of torture and ill-treatment. 38. When allegations of torture were looked into, some investigative steps, such as medical examinations, witness interviews and the provision of timely access to the scene of the events, were either severely delayed or completely thwarted. Moreover, the Subcommittee observed that accounts of suspicious injuries were treated in a variety of ways. In some cases, a report was forwarded to the prosecutor’s office; in others, it was sent to the police. In any event, it was not clear that investigations systematically followed from such reports, perhaps because some were sent to the police officers accused of committing the act. In addition, a number of reports received no reply and others received only an initial acknowledgment. 39. The Subcommittee recommends that the State party take urgent measures to prevent and punish all acts of torture and ill-treatment occurring at the hands of, or with the consent or acquiescence of, State officials. To that end, the Subcommittee recommends that the State party: (a) investigate all allegations of torture and illtreatment through processes that are prompt, impartial and transparent, in addition to being efficient and effective; and (b) prosecute those responsible. Persons convicted for acts of torture and ill-treatment should be sanctioned with penalties commensurate with the severity of their crimes. 40. The Subcommittee also recommends that allegations of torture and illtreatment, as well as suspicions of such acts arising from observable injuries and/or medical examinations, be systematically acted upon in the same way and that those making the allegations be protected from reprisals. 41. The Subcommittee further recommends that the State party establish and maintain a national register of all allegations of torture and ill-treatment that includes the following information: (a) The details of each allegation received; (b) An indication of the institution or location where the act or condition is alleged to have taken place; (c) The date when the allegation was received; (d) The rationale for the decision taken in respect of the allegation and the date of that decision; (e) 8 Any action taken as a result.