A/71/44 communication No. 494/2012, H.B. v. Algeria, the Committee found violations of article 1; article 2 (1), read in conjunction with article 1; and articles 11-14 of the Convention, also in relation to torture of the complainant in detention. In communication No. 500/2012, Martínez v. Mexico, the Committee found violations of articles 1, 2 (1), 12-15 and 22 of the Convention in relation to torture in preventive custody, inhuman conditions of detention and failure of the State party to respect the Committee’s request for protective measures for the complainants. 69. The Committee also found two communications, namely, No. 512/2012, Y. v. Canada and No. 642/2014, M.T. v. Sweden, inadmissible and discontinued the consideration of communication No. 574/2013, R.S. v. Canada. 70. At its fifty-sixth session, the Committee adopted decisions on the merits in respect of communications No. 569/2013, M.C. v. Netherlands, No. 586/2014, R.G. et al v. Sweden, No. 523/2012, X. v. Finland, No. 562/2013, J.K. v. Canada, No. 613/2014, F.B. v. Netherlands, No. 580/2014, F.K. v. Denmark, No. 578/2013, E.N. v. Burundi, No. 671/2015, D.I.S. v. Hungary, No. 565/2013, S.A.P. et al. v. Switzerland, No. 591/2014, K.N. v. Australia, and No. 594/2014, B.M.S. v. Sweden. 71. The Committee found that the forcible return of the complainants would constitute a violation by the States parties of article 3 of the Convention in its decisions on communications No. 569/2013, M.C. v. Netherlands, No. 586/2014, R.G. et al v. Sweden, No. 523/2012, X. v. Finland, No. 562/2013, J.K. v. Canada, No. 613/2014, F.B. v. Netherlands, No. 580/2014, F.K. v. Denmark. In communication No. 580/2014, F.K. v. Denmark, the Committee also found a violation of article 12, read in conjunction with article 16, of the Convention, because the State party’s authorities had failed to investigate allegations of ill-treatment. In communication No. 578/2013, E.N. v. Burundi, the Committee found violations of article 1; article 2 (1), read in conjunction with article 1; and articles 11-14 of the Convention. In communication No. 671/2015, D.I.S. v. Hungary, the Committee found a violation of article 22 of the Convention because of the State party’s failure to cooperate and to respect the Committee’s requests for interim measures. 72. The Committee found that the forcible return of the complainants would not constitute a violation by the States parties of article 3 of the Convention in its decisions on communications No. 565/2013, S.A.P. et al. v. Switzerland, No. 591/2014, K.N. v. Australia, and No. 594/2014, B.M.S. v. Sweden. 73. The Committee also found six communications, namely, No. 577/2013, N.B. v. Russian Federation, No. 604/2014, H.Z. v. Canada, No. 635/2014, M.K. and B.B. v. Switzerland, No. 643/2014, U.A. v. Sweden, No. 536/2013, H.B.A. et al. v. Canada, and No. 545/2013, Z. v. Switzerland, inadmissible and discontinued the consideration of communications No. 358/2008, A.S. v. Canada, No. 403/2009, Y.N. v. Switzerland, No. 410/2010, H.S. et al v. Canada, No. 563/2013, N.S. v. Canada, No. 564/2013, A.A. v. Sweden, No. 570/2013, G.M. v. Switzerland, No. 587/2014, R.U. et al v. Sweden, No. 622/2014, S.O. v. Morocco, No. 631/2014, D.G. v. Norway, and No. 676/2015, A.L. v. Morocco. 74. At its fifty-seventh session, the Committee adopted decisions on the merits in respect of communications No. 558/2013, R.D. et al. v. Switzerland, No. 628/2014, J.N. v. Denmark, No. 531/2012, L.A. v. Algeria, No. 551/2013, Elaïba v. Tunisia, No. 583/2014, A. v. Canada, No. 605/2014, G.R. v. Australia, No. 611/2014, P.A. v. Netherlands. 75. The Committee found that the forcible return of the complainants would constitute a violation by the States parties of article 3 of the Convention in its decisions on communications No. 558/2013, R.D. et al. v. Switzerland, and No. 628/2014, J.N. v. Denmark. In communication No. 531/2012, L.A. v. Algeria, the Committee found a violation of article 13 of the Convention. In communication No. 551/2013, Elaïba v. GE.16-13567 15