A/65/273 officials had obtained confessions under torture, this did not trigger official criminal investigations against the perpetrators. The same holds true for Sri Lanka. 56. A further concern is the fact that the authorities entrusted with investigating allegations of torture and ill-treatment are frequently the same authorities who are accused of committing such acts (i.e. the police), as is the case in Denmark, Georgia, Jordan and Nepal. Additionally, in Georgia, Mongolia and Paraguay, the investigation may also be carried out by the Office of the Prosecutor, the same authority responsible for prosecuting the case against the victim. The lack of independent investigating bodies with no connection to the authority investigating or prosecuting the case (a proper “police-police”) prevents victims from obtaining justice and is one of the main impediments to combating impunity. 4. Prosecutions 57. In terms of prosecutions, the Special Rapporteur was sadly surprised at the low number of people prosecuted for torture in the countries he visited. He came across cases of officials being subject to disciplinary or administrative procedures for offences such as abuse of power and, in some cases, convictions for offences such as causing physical injuries, as in Jordan and Paraguay. These types of convictions not only result from the lack of a specific criminal offence of torture, but are in some instances used to treat the act of torture as a minor offence. 58. In most countries visited by the Special Rapporteur, he was not presented with a single case of a law enforcement official being suspended, investigated and prosecuted, let alone convicted, for torture. This was the case in Mongolia, Indonesia, Nepal, Nigeria and Togo, among other countries. Three countries where the Special Rapporteur did receive information that law enforcement officials had been convicted of torture were China, the Republic of Moldova and Sri Lanka. In Sri Lanka, 34 officials had been indicted and three convicted of torture. In Uruguay, there were several ongoing trials for crimes committed in the past. Although several people had been convicted, none had yet been convicted of torture. In Equatorial Guinea, only one official had been tried, but had not been convicted, despite the fact that torture is systematically practised there. 59. In cases where there are convictions, the Special Rapporteur witnessed that the perpetrators are often given minor sentences or are only obliged to pay fines. This lack of appropriate sanctioning, including lack of convictions, convictions based on other offences, and the use of disciplinary sanctions or minor sentences, translates into a lack of any deterrent and is an affront to the victims. 60. In addition, one of the practices observed by the Special Rapporteur was that in some countries, such as Sri Lanka, reparations are used as a substitute for prosecution. That is, if the victim received compensation or another form of reparation, the case was closed and no further criminal proceedings were pursued. Although, in many instances, victims may be in need of money to pay for medical treatment or legal fees, compensation should not be used as a substitute for prosecution. IV. Role of rehabilitation centres for victims of torture 61. Following the obligations of States to prevent torture and to hold perpetrators accountable, article 14 of the Convention against Torture stipulates that each State 10-48049 13