CAT/C/50/D/430/2010 rights would be protected in the event of his extradition to Tunisia. In response, the Tunisian Ministry of Foreign Affairs sent two letters5 in which it provided diplomatic assurances that the proceedings that would be initiated upon Mr. Abichou’s extradition would be conducted in accordance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which has been ratified by Tunisia, and, in the event of a conviction, Mr. Abichou would serve his sentence in a prison that abided by the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners. 2.7 On 20 May 2010, the Saarland Regional High Court determined that the extradition would be lawful, thereby authorizing the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs to formally order the extradition of Mr. Abichou. Assisted by his counsel, Mr. Abichou challenged the decision of 20 May 2010 on the grounds that the Regional High Court had failed to rule on several lines of argument that he had put forward, notably those dealing with the risk of torture. Although the appeal had no suspensive effect, the prosecuting authorities agreed not to extradite Mr. Abichou until the Court had ruled on these points. 2.8 On 8 July 2010, the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs sent a note verbale to the Tunisian embassy in Berlin in which it confirmed the Government’s consent to the extradition of Mr. Abichou. It was not until 19 August 2010 that, at his request, the counsel of Mr. Abichou was apprised of the contents of this correspondence. 2.9 On 12 July 2010, the Saarland Regional High Court upheld its decision of 20 May 2010 on the grounds that, although aware of reports from international non-governmental organizations concerning the risk of torture in Tunisia, the Court put its trust in the Tunisian Government. Furthermore, the Court cited a lack of evidence of any direct threat to the applicant. 2.10 On 22 July 2010, Mr. Abichou submitted an urgent appeal to the German Constitutional Court for interim measures and requested it to set aside the Regional High Court’s decision. This petition was rejected on 28 July 2010. The Saarbrücken prosecuting authorities then sent a letter to the central office of the German Criminal Investigation Department in Wiesbaden requesting that it make arrangements for Mr. Abichou’s extradition. 2.11 On 20 August 2010, Mr. Abichou submitted a request for interim measures6 to the European Court of Human Rights pursuant to rule 39 of the Rules of Court. The application was rejected by the Court on 23 August 2010, with no reason for the rejection being given. 2.12 On 25 August 2010, the complainant learned that the extradition of her husband, Mr. Abichou, would take place on that same day at 1 p.m. The extradition was carried out as planned on 25 August 2010. The complaint 3.1 The complainant refers to the concluding observations of the Human Rights Committee on the report of Tunisia, adopted on 28 March 2008,7 and states that torture is 5 6 7 4 The dates of which are illegible (apparently dated 13 May 2010). In her subsequent comments on the State party’s observations on the merits, the complainant went on to specify that the two requests for interim measures were made on 3 and 19 August 2010. According to which the Committee was shown to be “concerned about serious and substantiated reports that acts of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment are being committed in the territory of the State party. According to some of these reports: (a) some judges refuse to register complaints of ill-treatment or torture; (b) some inquiries ordered subsequent to such complaints take an unreasonable amount of time; and (c) some superiors responsible for the conduct of their agents, in violation of article 7 of the Covenant, are neither investigated nor prosecuted” GE.13-45615