E/CN.4/1990/17/Add.l page 9 with, it was left to the Public Prosecutor's office to decide lawfulness of the detention. Moreover, the Department itself own initiative, table such cases during the meetings with the which were provided for on a monthly basis in the protocol of concluded with that body. on the could, on its Judicial Council co-ordination 36. In view of the fact that the number of alleged cases of illegal or arbitrary arrest or detention is still relatively high, the Special Rapporteur feels that the Public Prosecutor's office should thoroughly scrutinize the legality of all arrests, not only at the moment when they are registered (after the 48-hour term), but also when requests for the renewal of a remand order are made. 37. Of equal importance for the strict compliance with the legal rules is the presentation of the detainee in persona to the competent judge within five days after his arrest since this enables the detainee to inform the judge about the circumstances under which he was arrested and to provide him with all other relevant information. There again, the Special Rapporteur feels that the prevalent rules should be applied more strictly. It has come to his knowledge that in numerous cases detainees were not presented to a judge within the period prescribed by the law, or were not presented to a judge at all, although a remand order was issued. 38. Useful as the competences of the Department are, in essence they are corrective measures which - apart from cases of manifestly illegal detention would not have been necessary if the Public Prosecutor's office and the judiciary had carried out their mandate satisfactorily. 39. Article 9, paragraph 4, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that anyone who is deprived of his liberty by arrest or detention shall be entitled to take proceedings before a court, in order that that court may decide without delay on the lawfulness of his detention and order his release if the detention is not lawful. It has not become clear to the Special Rapporteur whether the Code of Criminal Procedure explicitly gives a detained person such right to take, on his own initiative or through his lawyer, such proceedings before a court. In view of the fact that the report submitted by the Government of Zaire under article 40 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights makes no mention of such legal provisions (while being very elaborate on other issues), the Special Rapporteur feels entitled to assume that such a provision does not exist. An amendment to the Code of Criminal Procedure to bring it in conformity with article 9, paragraph 4, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights would be an important step to suppress and prevent illegal or arbitrary arrest or detention. 40. All law-enforcement forces have their own places of detention (cachots). As stated before, in the case of common crimes, the suspect is usually transferred to a general prison relatively soon after his arrest. Persons, however, who are suspected of having committed offences against the security of the State or of the armed forces are usually kept in the detention place of the security agency concerned until the investigation has been completed. The Administrateur-General of Agence Nationale de Documentation told the Special Rapporteur that in such cases it was impossible to transfer the suspect to the place where accused persons awaiting trial were normally kept in view of the fact that such places of detention were relatively open and the regime for