CAT/C/50/D/430/2010 States Department of State in its 2009 report, which was consulted by the authorities of the State Party, “prison conditions generally did not meet international standards”. This finding was confirmed by ACAT-France in its 2010 report entitled A World of Torture.23 8.7 The complainant rejects all aspects of the State party’s assertion that Onsi Abichou’s acquittal on appeal and subsequent release on 19 May 2011 demonstrate that Tunisia honoured its assurances. If Onsi Abichou was able to receive a fair trial on appeal, it was not as a result of the diplomatic assurances provided by the former Tunisian Government but rather a consequence of the positive changes that came in the wake of the revolution of 14 January 2011 and the efforts of ACAT-France and Radhia Nasraoui, the lawyer of the accused, to focus attention on the case. These efforts had made it possible to exercise the right to confront witnesses – an unprecedented procedure in Tunisian legal practice. The State party deliberately fails to take into account the radical political change that made Onsi Abichou’s acquittal possible and overlooks the unfair trial to which he was subjected at first instance, one month before the revolution. The complainant refers to the error committed by the Saarbrücken Regional High Court, which had held that Onsi Abichou’s conviction was also based on other corroborating evidence, rather than solely on statements by witnesses who had been tortured. According to the complainant, Onsi Abichou’s acquittal by the Tunisian judge who heard the appeal demonstrates that this was not true. 8.8 Lastly, in response to the argument advanced by the State party that the allegations of acts of torture perpetrated against Onsi Abichou’s alleged accomplices were not substantiated,24 the complainant refers to two written records of interviews conducted in the Mornaguia prison on 21 March 2011 by ACAT-France with prisoners Mohamed Zaied and Mohamed Jelouali. These records attest to the torture inflicted on Onsi Abichou’s alleged accomplices during the investigation.25 She also cites the complaint of torture prepared by Mohamed Abbou, Mohamed Zaied’s lawyer, and filed with the public prosecutor attached to the Tunis court of first instance on 19 April 2011. The complainant concludes by reiterating that these records, which are corroborated by numerous documentary sources, attest to the use of torture in Tunisia and are sufficient to prove that Onsi Abichou was exposed to a substantial and serious risk of torture at the time of his extradition to Tunisia. Most of this information was available to the State party at the time when it carried out the 23 24 25 GE.13-45615 ACAT-France, A World of Torture (2010), p. 187: Conditions of detention in Tunisian prisons are deficient in every respect. Overcrowding is a recurring problem. According to former inmates’ accounts compiled by ACAT-France, prisoners are often required to sleep two or three to a bed, or else on the floor. Sanitation facilities, consisting of a faucet and a toilet, are shared by some one hundred prisoners. Normally each prisoner is entitled to shower once a week, but this right is sometimes denied, either because there are too many prisoners or in order to punish an inmate. Owing to poor conditions of hygiene, diseases spread very quickly. Access to treatment is limited and deprivation of care is often used as a punishment, especially for political prisoners. See para. 6.4 above. [Attached to the case file] According to witnesses, the two prisoners were beaten at the time of their arrest on 15 February 2008 and then were savagely tortured during the 10 days that they were held in police custody at the border station. They were finally brought before the investigating judge prior to being transferred to Mornaguia prison. For the purposes of an additional investigation requested by the judge, the two prisoners were brought back to the Kabaria anti-drug brigade, where they were tortured again. The two were ultimately sentenced to life imprisonment by the Tunis court of first instance, presided over by Judge Mehrez Hammami, who was discharged from his duties following the revolution. Mohamed Jelouali reportedly spoke to the investigating judge about the torture to which he had been subjected; the judge reportedly replied that he deserved what he got. For his part, Mohamed Zaied appears to have been clearly dissuaded by the doctor who saw him upon his admission to Mornaguia prison from speaking about the fact that he had been tortured. Mohamed Zaied and Mohamed Jelouali are suffering from serious physical and psychological sequelae of the torture to which they were subjected. 13