CCPR/C/112/D/2086/2011 3.5 The authors maintain that the arrest and incommunicado detention of Sahraoui Ayache, which have still not been acknowledged by the State party, are arbitrary and constitute a violation of article 9, paragraphs 1 to 5, of the Covenant. Sahraoui Ayache was arrested without a warrant and was not informed of the reasons for his arrest or the charges against him. He was never brought before a judicial authority and never had the opportunity to challenge the lawfulness of his detention. In addition, no compensation for his arbitrary arrest and detention were ever received by the eligible parties. 3.6 The authors state that Sahraoui Ayache is also the victim of a violation of his right to be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person while in detention, in violation of article 10, paragraph 1, of the Covenant. The authors recall the Committee’s jurisprudence according to which enforced disappearance itself constitutes a violation of article 10 of the Covenant.9 The authors also refer to Sahraoui Ayache’s conditions of detention and conclude that the State party has violated his rights under article 10 of the Covenant. 3.7 The authors state that Sahraoui Ayache was unable to enjoy his fundamental rights because he was detained incommunicado, in violation of the right to recognition as a person before the law, which is guaranteed by article 16 of the Covenant. They refer to the Committee’s 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 refusal to recognize that person 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, have been systematically impeded. In such situations, disappeared persons are in practice deprived of their capacity to exercise their rights and of access to any possible remedy as a direct consequence of the actions of the State, which must be interpreted as a refusal to recognize such victims as persons before the law.10 3.8 The authors contend that the circumstances in which Sahraoui Ayache was arrested, at his home early in the morning, by security forces who entered without a search warrant, constitute unlawful and arbitrary interference with his home, in violation of article 17 of the Covenant.11 3.9 Lastly, the authors consider that Sahraoui Ayache was prevented from exercising his right to an effective remedy in respect of his detention and the alleged violations of articles 7, 9, 10 (para. 1), 16 and 17 of the Covenant, in violation of article 2 (para. 3) of the Covenant. The authors also contend that, so long as the truth about the fate of Sahraoui Ayache has not been established, the State party has an obligation under article 2 (para. 3), read in conjunction with article 6 (para. 1), to conduct a thorough investigation, inform the person’s family and friends of the progress and results of the investigation and prosecute anyone held to be responsible for enforced disappearance. The authors explored every avenue available to them in order to find out what had happened to Sahraoui Ayache, but none of their queries were followed up on by the State party. The authors consider that the State party’s lack of diligence and failure to conduct an investigation into their claims of unlawful detention and enforced disappearance are also a violation of article 2, paragraph 3, in respect of themselves and their family. 9 10 11 6 See communication No. 1469/2006, Sharma v. Nepal, Views adopted on 28 October 2008, para. 7.7. The authors cite communication No. 1328/2004, Cheraitia v. Algeria, and Atmana v. Algeria. The authors cite communication No. 687/1996, Rojas García v. Colombia, Views adopted on 3 April 2001, in which the Committee considered that the raid by hooded police officers, who entered the house through the roof in the middle of the night, constituted arbitrary interference in the residence of the Rojas García family. GE.14-21909