CAT/C/BGR/CO/4-5 (c) appeals; Ensure interpretation services for asylum-seekers in asylum cases and (d) Submit situations covered by article 3 of the Convention to a thorough risk assessment, notably by ensuring appropriate training for judges regarding the risks of torture in receiving countries and by automatically holding individual interviews in order to assess the personal risk to applicants; and (e) Follow up cases, in the light of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights and, in particular, follow up the cases of the two rejected Palestinian asylum-seekers, Youssef Kayed who was tortured upon his return to Lebanon on 27 November 2010, and Moussa Kamel Ismael, who was tortured upon his return to Lebanon, also on 27 November 2010, and update the Committee on their situation in its next periodic report. Jurisdiction over offences referred to in article 4 of the Convention 17. The Committee is concerned that current Bulgarian legislation does not provide for jurisdiction over offences referred to in article 4 of the Convention for all acts of torture owing to the absence of a specific and autonomous offence of torture which corresponds to the definition outlined in the Convention (arts. 5, 6 and 7). The Committee recommends that the State party adopt a definition of torture in accordance with the Convention so as to ensure that all acts of torture, and not only those amounting to war crimes, can be prosecuted under jurisdiction over offences referred to in article 4 of the Convention and that all suspected perpetrators of acts of torture found in Bulgarian territory are either extradited or prosecuted in accordance with article 6 of the Penal Code. Non-admissibility of evidence as a result of torture 18. The Committee is concerned about the lack of legislation in the State party ensuring the non-admissibility of evidence obtained as a result of torture (art. 15). The Committee recommends that the State party enact legislation specifically prohibiting the use of statements obtained under torture as evidence in conformity with the Convention (art. 15) and that the competent authorities of the State party compile statistics and submit to the Committee cases where evidence obtained as a result of torture has been held inadmissible. Treatment of persons in social institutions, including those with mental disabilities 19. The Committee is concerned: (a) That persons with mental disabilities in State and municipal social institutions, particularly in medical institutional settings, do not enjoy adequate legal safeguards and procedural guarantees regarding the respect of their right to mental and physical integrity; that persons deprived of their legal capacity and whose decisions and preference are not taken into account have no means to challenge the violation of their rights; admission procedures and systems of guardianship often include officials from the institutions in which persons with disabilities are confined, which may result in conflict of interest and de facto detention, while the guardians’ consent to medical treatment may amount to forced treatment; by the use of restraint and forced administration of intrusive and irreversible treatments such as neuroleptic drugs; and that there is no independent inspection mechanism for mental health institutions; at the competence of staff, frequency of visits by specialists and the material conditions of such institutions, including their remote locations, far from families and large medical centres; 6