CCPR/C/112/D/2132/2012 State party, the Committee finds a violation of article 9 in respect of Adel, Tarek and Mohamed Kerouane.25 7.8 Regarding the complaint under article 10, paragraph 1, the Committee reiterates that persons deprived of their liberty must not be subjected to any hardship or constraint other than that resulting from the deprivation of liberty and that they must be treated with humanity and respect for their dignity. In view of the incommunicado detention and in the absence of information from the State party in this regard, the Committee finds a violation of article 10, paragraph 1, of the Covenant in respect of Adel, Tarek and Mohamed Kerouane.26 7.9 With regard to the alleged violation of article 16, the Committee reiterates its established 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 him or her 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 (art. 2, para. 3, of the Covenant), have been systematically impeded. 27 In the present case, the Committee notes that the State party authorities have given the family no information on the fate or whereabouts of Adel, Tarek and Mohamed Kerouane since their arrest, in spite of the numerous requests made to various authorities of the State party. The Committee therefore finds that the enforced disappearance of Adel, Tarek and Mohamed Kerouane on 12 April 1994, 20 May 1994 and 22 February 1996, respectively, removed them from the protection of the law and deprived them of their right to recognition as persons before the law, in violation of article 16 of the Covenant. 7.10 In light of the above, the Committee will not consider the claims based on the violation of article 23, paragraph 1, of the Covenant separately. 7.11 The authors invoke article 2, paragraph 3, of the Covenant, which imposes on States parties the obligation to ensure an effective remedy for all persons whose Covenant rights have been violated. The Committee attaches importance to the establishment by States parties of appropriate judicial and administrative mechanisms for addressing claims of rights violations. It refers to its general comment No. 31 (2004) on the nature of the general legal obligation imposed on States parties to the Covenant, which provides inter alia that a failure by a State party to investigate allegations of violations could in and of itself give rise to a separate breach of the Covenant. In the present case, the victims’ family repeatedly alerted the competent authorities, including judicial authorities such as the Constantine prosecutor, to the disappearance of Adel, Tarek and Mohamed Kerouane, but all their efforts proved futile and the State party has conducted no thorough and effective investigation into the disappearance of Adel, Tarek and Mohamed Kerouane. Furthermore, the absence of the legal right to take judicial proceedings since the promulgation of Ordinance No. 06-01 implementing the Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation continues to deprive Adel, Tarek and Mohamed Kerouane and their family of access to an effective remedy, because the Ordinance prohibits the pursuit of legal remedies to shed light on the most serious crimes such as enforced disappearance.28 In light of the foregoing, the Committee concludes that the facts before it reveal a violation of article 2, (para. 3), read in conjunction with articles 6 (para. 1), 7, 9, 10 (para. 1) and 16 of the Covenant, with 25 26 27 28 14 Khirani v. Algeria, para. 7.7; and Berzig v. Algeria, para. 8.7. See general comment No. 21 on article 10, para. 3; and, for example, communication No. 1780/2008, Zarzi v. Algeria, Views adopted on 22 March 2011, para. 7.8. Khirani v. Algeria, para. 7.9. CCPR/C/DZA/CO/3, para. 7. GE.14-22477