CCPR/C/113/D/2000/2010 unclear, its report contains details of the torture and ill-treatment Mr. Katwal was subjected to while in custody. It establishes that officials tried to cover up the circumstances of his death and identifies the persons allegedly responsible. 2.7 The author explains that the report of the Prisoner Investigation Team mentions that the body of the victim was buried in a pit near the local Chandale Stream Khola and a group of soldiers were supposed to burn the remains a few days after his death, to destroy all evidence. However, the Team states that the soldiers did not find the body, and that therefore it was not burned. On this point, the Verification Committee of the Ministry of Home Affairs differs with the Team in finding that the body was in fact exhumed from its original grave 8 to 10 days after the death and burned on the same spot. No statement was made as to whether the Prisoner Investigation Team itself tried to locate the body. The body of the victim was never returned to the author’s family. 2.8 Based on the conclusions reached by the Prisoner Investigation Team, the Supreme Court of Nepal made the following finding on 1 June 2007: “The investigation undertaken […] reveals that Mr. Chakra Bahadur Katwal of writ No. 632 had appeared at the office of the Chief District Officer in person on 13 December 2001, and was put in illegal detention by the order of the Chief District Officer at the District Police Office; he was then transferred to the army barracks. He was killed on 16 December 2001 due to cruel torture inflicted upon him by army officers.” 2.9 The Supreme Court ordered the investigation and subsequent prosecution of those responsible for the victim’s disappearance and death, as identified in the report of the Prisoner Investigation Team. In addition to finding that Mr. Katwal was dead and ordering the prosecution of those responsible, the ruling of the Supreme Court of 1 June 2007 instructed the payment of immediate relief to the next of kin of the victim. 2.10 Eight months after the ruling of the Supreme Court was delivered, Mr. Katwal’s family was provided with Nr 200,000 by the Home Ministry. 3 On 29 June 2009, the author received Nr 100,000 from the Peace Ministry. 4 The author did not receive any other compensation as a relative of a disappeared person. She declares that she spent at least Nr 720,000 in relation to her husband’s disappearance and her daughter’s and her own arrests and torture. The author does not receive her husband’s pension and can do only limited work because of the injuries she received as a result of the beatings. 2.11 In addition to these proceedings, in February 2006, the author’s daughter submitted a complaint about her own arrest to the National Human Rights Commission, which had already registered the author’s complaint concerning the disappearance of her husband. Furthermore, the International Committee of the Red Cross added Mr. Katwal’s name to their database further to a request by the author’s daughter. 2.12 The author has exhausted all available and effective domestic remedies. The decision of the Supreme Court rendered on 1 June 2007 is final and binding. The Court itself stated that no further investigation with regard to the author’s husband needed to be carried out since it considered the investigation of the Prisoner Investigation Team to be a “judicial one”, whose “conclusion […] [was] final regarding the condition” of Mr. Katwal. However, the ordered prosecution of those responsible has not taken place. The author notes that no other remedy is available in Nepal to which the author could turn in search of redress. 3 4 4 On 31 December 2007, Nr 200,000 was approximately US$ 3,130. Source: Nepal Rastra Bank (Central Bank of Nepal), http://nrb.org.np. Approximately US$ 1,300. Source: Nepal Rastra Bank (Central Bank of Nepal), http://nrb.org.np.