CCPR/C/117/D/2224/2012 The complaint 3.1 The author claims that his prosecution and imprisonment on account of his religious beliefs expressed in his conscientious objection to military service in itself constitutes inhuman or degrading treatment within the meaning of article 7 of the Covenant.6 3.2 The author also claims a violation of article 7 of the Covenant on account of the “inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment” he received while in detention, which included police brutality, and on account of the conditions of imprisonment at the LBK-12 prison. In this regard, he refers, inter alia, to the concluding observations on Turkmenistan by the Committee against Torture,7 the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights,8 and the report of February 2010 by the country’s Independent Lawyers Association.9 These documents indicate that the practice of torture and ill-treatment of detainees is widespread in the State party. They also highlight the serious risk of being subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment upon removal to Turkmenistan, and the fact that the LBK-12 prison is situated in a desert where temperatures fall to -20°C in winter and rise to 50°C in the summer heatwaves. The prison is overcrowded, and prisoners with tuberculosis and skin diseases are kept together with healthy inmates, putting the author at a high risk of contracting tuberculosis and other 6 7 8 9 See, for example, Feti Demirtas v. Turkey, in which the European Court of Human Rights held that the applicant suffered inhuman and degrading treatment because he was subjected to “numerous criminal proceedings” and “criminal convictions” as well as ill-treatment while in prison (para. 91). This conclusion applies mutatis mutandis to the author’s case. See CAT/C/TKM/CO/1, paras. 14, 18 and 19, in which the Committee against Torture expressed its concern at, inter alia, the ongoing physical abuse and psychological pressures by prison staff, including collective punishment, ill-treatment as a “preventive” measure, the use of solitary confinement, and sexual violence and rape by prison officers or inmates, which had reportedly motivated the suicides of several detainees. The Committee against Torture also expressed deep concern about the material and hygiene conditions in places of deprivation of liberty, such as inadequate food and health care, severe overcrowding, and unnecessary restrictions on family visits. See, for example, Kolesnik v. Russia (application No. 26876/08, judgment of 17 June 2010) at paras. 68, 69 and 72, in which the European Court of Human Rights concluded that an extradition order to Turkmenistan for criminal prosecution subjected the applicant in that case to “serious risk” of being subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The factors taken into account included credible and consistent reports from various reputable sources of widespread torture, beatings and use of force against criminal suspects by the Turkmen law enforcement authorities, and very poor conditions of detention. The February 2010 report by the country’s Independent Lawyers Association describes the LBK-12 prison as follows: The penitentiary institution (popularly referred to as Shagal) is the largest in Turkmenistan in size and prison population. It is designed to accommodate up to 2,100 inmates. At the time of the report, it housed 5,700 detainees. Despite the minimum security conditions for firsttime offenders, prison conditions are very tough. The colony is based in the lifeless desert, with winter temperatures falling to -20°C, and in the summer, heatwaves of up to 50°C. Due to the harsh climatic conditions, the overcrowding, the fact that prisoners diagnosed with tuberculosis and skin diseases are kept together with healthy inmates, and the scarce supplies of food, medications and personal hygiene products, the institution reports the highest mortality rate, of 5.2 per cent, among the country’s penitentiary facilities. Similarly to other penitentiary facilities in Turkmenistan, physical abuse is used against inmates by the colony personnel and other individuals with the consent and often following the instructions of the colony’s administration. Primarily, detainees who have been placed in the prison for the first time and are consequently not aware of the unofficial prison rules are subjected to violence. Similar observations on the conditions in prisons in Turkmenistan are made in the 2011 country report of the Department of State (United States of America) and the Amnesty International report of February 2012. 5