CCPR/C/112/D/2083/2011 before it disclose a violation with respect to the author of article 7 of the Covenant read alone and in conjunction with article 2, paragraph 3.24 8.7 With regard to the alleged violation of article 9, the Committee notes the author’s claim that Yahia Kroumi was arrested without a warrant by soldiers on 12 August 1994, that he was not charged or brought before a judicial authority, which would have enabled him to challenge the lawfulness of his detention, and that no official information was given to his friends and family regarding his fate, despite the fact that the authorities certified that his disappearance had occurred “in the context of the national tragedy”. 25 In the absence of a satisfactory explanation from the State party on these points, the Committee finds a violation of article 9 with regard to Yahia Kroumi. 26 8.8 Regarding the complaint under article 10, paragraph 1, the Committee reiterates that persons deprived of their liberty may not be subjected to any hardship or constraint other than that resulting from the deprivation of liberty and that they must be treated with humanity and respect for their dignity. In view of the allegations concerning the incommunicado detention of Yahia Kroumi under conditions that caused the death of many persons in a single night, and in the absence of information from the State party in that regard, the Committee finds a violation of article 10, paragraph 1, of the Covenant. 27 8.9 With regard to the alleged violation of article 16, the Committee reiterates its established jurisprudence, according to which the intentional removal of a person from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time may constitute a denial of his or her right to recognition as a person before the law if the victim was in the hands of the State authorities when last seen and if the efforts of his or her relatives to obtain access to potentially effective remedies, including judicial remedies (Covenant, art. 3, para. 2), have been systematically impeded.28 In the present case, the Committee notes that the State party has not furnished any explanation concerning the fate of Yahia Kroumi, despite the multiple requests addressed by the author to the State party. The Committee concludes that the enforced disappearance of Yahia Kroumi some 20 years ago removed him from the protection of the law and deprived him of his right to recognition as a person before the law, in violation of article 16 of the Covenant. 8.10 With regard to the alleged violation of article 17, the Committee notes that the State party did not provide any justification for or clarification of the entry of soldiers into the family home of Yahia Kroumi early in the morning without a warrant. The Committee concludes that the entry of officials into the family home of Yahia Kroumi in such circumstances constitutes unlawful interference with his home, in violation of article 17 of the Covenant.29 8.11 The author invokes article 2, paragraph 3, of the Covenant, which imposes on States parties the obligation to ensure an effective remedy for all persons whose Covenant rights 24 25 26 27 28 29 14 See Mezine v. Algeria, para. 8.6; Khirani v. Algeria, para. 7.6; Berzig v. Algeria, para. 8.6; El Abani v. Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, para. 7.5; and communication No. 1422/2005, El Hassy v. Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Views adopted on 24 October 2007, para. 6.11. See paras. 2.3 and 2.5 above. See, inter alia, Mezine v. Algeria, para. 8.7; Khirani v. Algeria, para. 7.7; and Berzig v. Algeria, para. 8.7. See general comment No. 21 (1992) on humane treatment of persons deprived of their liberty, para. 3; Mezine v. Algeria, para. 8.8; Zarzi v. Algeria, para. 7.8; and communication No. 1134/2002, GorjiDinka v. Cameroon, Views adopted on 17 March 2005, para. 5.2. Mezine v. Algeria, para. 8.9; Khirani v. Algeria, para. 7.9; Berzig v. Algeria, para. 8.9; Zarzi v. Algeria, para. 7.9; Benaziza v. Algeria, para. 9.8; Atamna v. Algeria, para. 7.8; and communication No. 1495/2006, Madoui v. Algeria, Views adopted on 28 October 2008, para. 7.7. Mezine v. Algeria, para. 8.10. GE.14-22365