Recommendation (E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.5) Situation during visit (See E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.5) who made the confession. Serious consideration should be given to video and audio taping of all persons present during proceedings in interrogation rooms Steps taken since December 2007/current situation • There was a lack of prosecutions in the face of mounting and credible allegations of torture and other acts of ill-treatment by the police, APF and RNA. • There was a lack of confidence in the justice system and the rule of law on the part of victims and their families. • and sometimes exclusive part of an investigation. Reportedly, some members of the police even implied that they would not be able to obtain a confession without using force It is common for defendants to inform courts at the time of committal hearings that they did not give statements voluntarily and, often, such statements are ruled out as evidence. However, in many other cases this does not happen, or the victim is afraid to allege torture or other ill-treatment Non-governmental sources: most detainees do not make formal complaints of torture and other ill-treatment when brought before a judge or prosecutor, mostly for fear of reprisals. Although some judges have developed the practice of asking male detainees to remove their shirts and question them about their treatment at the hands of the police, this practice has not become uniform and, in any case, is inadequate to detect torture or other ill-treatment, particularly methods which do not leave physical marks and psychological torture or ill-treatment Judges do not systematically test the voluntary nature of a confession and many confessions extracted under duress A/HRC/10/44/Add.5 page 69 (h) Judges and prosecutors routinely ask persons brought from police custody how they have been treated and, even in the absence of a formal complaint from the defendant, order an independent medical examination Steps taken in previous years (See A/HRC/4/33/Add.2 and A/HRC/7/3/Add.2)