CAT/C/52/D/402/2009 2001, he was subject to conditions of detention that, he argues, in themselves constitute a form of torture. The intent of the torturers was to subject the complainant to severe suffering for the purpose of obtaining information or confessions, and punishing, intimidating or coercing him for his supposed political affiliations. It is also incontrovertible that his sufferings were inflicted by public officials. The perpetrators of these acts were, in fact, members of the National Gendarmerie and DRS, acting in an official capacity. A minister of the Government of the Republic personally supervised one of his torture sessions and encouraged it. These acts were orchestrated by a number of public authorities (security, military, prison, judiciary and executive). 3.2 The complainant also claims to be the victim of violations of article 2 (para. 1), and of articles 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15, read in conjunction with article 1. 3.3 With regard to article 2, paragraph 1, the complainant alleges that the State party has not taken the necessary steps to prevent torture. To begin with, it is clear that the State party continues to fail in its duty to seriously investigate or prosecute the great majority of serious crimes, including crimes of torture perpetrated since 1992. Moreover, order No. 06-01 implementing the Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation, an order which prohibits accusations against members of the Algerian security forces for serious crimes committed during the period known as the “national tragedy”, sets out heavy prison sentences for anyone who makes such accusations. Although that order pertains only to acts committed during the national tragedy, it has effects beyond that period, since it sends a clear message concerning the institutional impunity of the security forces. Furthermore, Algerian law contains no provisions that prohibit using confessions or statements extorted under torture as evidence, and therefore the security forces are not deterred from using those methods. Article 51 of the Algerian Code of Criminal Procedure also provides that a person may be legally held in custody for a period of 12 days incommunicado, without contact with the family, a lawyer or an independent doctor.5 The complainant therefore considers that the State party continues to fail to take the necessary measures to prevent such violations as torture, of which he has been a victim. 3.4 The complainant argues that the State party continues to violate article 11 of the Convention, by providing no supervision over pretrial detention or over the interrogations to which detainees are subjected. Although under the law police custody is limited to a period of 12 days, in practice that period is extended. The right to the assistance of counsel during detention is not guaranteed under Algerian law. The complainant also challenges the exclusive power of DRS, the authority in charge of a number of temporary holding places lacking effective supervision, which leads to abuses such as the ones he experienced. He also objects to the lack of a national registry of detained persons in Algeria. The complainant notes that, on one occasion, he was severely beaten just prior to appearing before the judge, who registered no reaction whatever, which demonstrates that the system for review is ineffective, in violation of article 11 of the Convention. 3.5 The complainant also considers that the State party has violated article 12, read in conjunction with article 6 (para. 2) and article 7 (para. 1) of the Convention. Despite repeated complaints by the complainant about the acts of torture inflicted on him, the State party has not held a prompt and impartial investigation some eight years after the incidents described.6 Although the alleged perpetrators of these acts of torture were in its territory, 5 6 GE.14-05037 The complainant invokes a report of the Collective of Families of the Disappeared in Algeria, “Alternative Report to the Human Rights Committee” (pp. 31–33), and an Amnesty International report, “Algeria: Briefing to the Committee against Torture”, 17 April 2008, Index AI, MDE 28/001/2008. More than 12 years, at the time of the Committee’s examination of the complaint. 7