CAT/C/ATG/CO/1 appropriate mechanism to protect a subordinate from reprisal if he or she refuses to carry out such an order. Fundamental legal safeguards 17. The Committee takes note of the procedural safeguards set out in the Constitution and the Criminal Procedure Act, in particular the right of detainees to access a lawyer of their choice, to be informed of the reason for their arrest or detention and to be brought before a magistrate within 48 hours of detention. It remains concerned, however, that in practice, many persons are held in custody beyond 96 hours, free legal aid is provided only in murder cases and interpretation services are unavailable until the individual is charged. It is also concerned that there is no provision guaranteeing that detained persons have the right to promptly contact a relative or a person of their choice and to request and receive an independent medical examination from the outset of the deprivation of liberty (art. 2). 18. The State party should: (a) Afford all detainees, in law and in practice, all fundamental legal safeguards from the outset of the deprivation of liberty, including the right to promptly access a lawyer, free of charge in the case of indigent persons; to receive free interpretation services; to notify a relative or other person of their choice about the detention or arrest; to be heard by a magistrate within 48 hours of detention; and to request and receive a medical examination by an independent doctor, which should be conducted out of the hearing and sight of public officials; (b) Promptly record all deprivations of liberty in a comprehensive national detention register; (c) Systematically monitor the compliance of all public officials with the legal safeguards and penalize any failure on the part of officials to comply; (d) Inform the Committee of the number of complaints received in regard to the failure to respect such safeguards and on the outcome of those complaints. Administration of justice and prolonged pretrial detention 19. The Committee is concerned at consistent reports indicating that a serious backlog of criminal court cases has resulted in prolonged pretrial detentions of up to five years. It regrets the lack of information, owing to the absence of a State party report, on the measures taken to deal with the backlog or to reduce the duration of pretrial detention (art. 2). 20. The State party should take measures to alleviate the backlog of criminal cases, including by increasing judicial capacity, in particular the number of magistrates. It should ensure, in law and in practice, that pretrial detention is used only in exceptional circumstances and for limited periods and should promote alternatives to pretrial detention, in accordance with the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Non-custodial Measures (the Tokyo Rules). Conditions of detention 21. The Committee is concerned about the extreme overcrowding at Her Majesty’s Prison, the sole prison facility in the State party, and regrets that the prison population has nearly doubled since 2000. While noting the State party’s efforts to use alternative measures such as parole and pardons, subject to certain terms, the Committee regrets the lack of information, owing to the absence of a State party report, on the impact of such measures in practice. The Committee is further concerned at the material conditions of the prison, including the inadequate levels of sanitation and ventilation, the lack of running water and proper toilets and the recent outbreak of infectious diseases, which led to the cancellation of rehabilitative courses. It also notes with concern that the health care, particularly for prisoners with psychosocial disabilities, is insufficient. It is also concerned about allegations of ill-treatment and sexual violence in the prison and regrets the lack of further information on the existing complaint mechanism in the prison (art. 11). 4