CAT/C/71/D/858/2018 Issues and proceedings before the Committee Consideration of admissibility 5.1 The Committee has ascertained, as it is required to do under article 22 (5) (a) of the Convention, that the same matter has not been and is not being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement. 5.2 The Committee recalls with concern that, despite the three reminders sent to it, the State party has not provided any observations. The Committee therefore finds that it is not precluded from considering the complaint under article 22 (5) (b) of the Convention.34 5.3 In the absence of any other obstacle to the admissibility of the communication, the Committee proceeds to its consideration of the merits of the claims submitted by the complainant under articles 1, 2 (1), 11 to 14 and 16 of the Convention. Consideration of the merits 6.1 The Committee has considered the present communication in the light of all the information made available to it by the parties, in accordance with article 22 (4) of the Convention. As the State party has not provided any observations on the merits, due weight must be given to the complainant’s allegations. 6.2 Before considering the allegations made by the complainant under the articles of the Convention invoked, the Committee must determine whether the acts to which A.H. and B.N. were subjected constitute torture within the meaning of article 1 of the Convention. 6.3 The Committee notes, first of all, the complainant’s allegation that A.H. was tied up, violently beaten across his back with truncheons, punched in the face and interrogated by police officers in order to obtain information about the whereabouts of demonstrators. The Committee also notes that A.H. was taken into a vehicle while covered in blood and that he was seen the following day, still tied up and injured, in a police vehicle. The Committee notes that his family and friends have not seen him since 14 December 2015, and that the complainant maintains that A.H. was a victim of enforced disappearance. The Committee also notes that these acts were intentionally inflicted by public officials in order to obtain information from the victim and to punish him for his political activities. The Committee also notes the allegations that B.N. is also a victim of torture within the meaning of article 1 of the Convention, in view of his son’s enforced disappearance and the constant threats that followed. The Committee notes that these events allegedly caused emotional and psychological suffering to B.N. and that they were inflicted intentionally by public officials in order to intimidate him. The Committee also notes that, by not submitting a response, the State party has not contested these facts. Lastly, the Committee notes that, should the Committee not endorse the characterization under article 1, the complainant claims, in the alternative, a violation of article 16 of the Convention in respect of A.H. and B.N. 6.4 The Committee recalls that States parties have a special obligation to ensure that the rights enshrined in the Convention are respected for persons deprived of their liberty and to take effective measures to prevent acts of torture.35 States parties must take the necessary measures to prevent public officials or private individuals from inflicting acts of torture on persons under their control. 36 The Committee further recalls that enforced disappearance entails multiple human rights violations and a failure by the State party concerned to comply with the obligations contained in the Convention, and constitutes in itself, in relation to the disappeared person, or may constitute, in relation to the person’s relatives, a form of torture or inhuman treatment contrary to the Convention.37 In these circumstances, the Committee 34 35 36 37 8 Hernández Colmenarez and Guerrero Sánchez v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, para. 5.3. See the Committee’s general comment No. 2 (2007), para. 13. Ibid., para. 17. Hernández Colmenarez and Guerrero Sánchez v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, para. 6.4. The Committee has also addressed the issue of enforced disappearance in its concluding observations on several occasions. See, for example, CAT/C/BDI/CO/2/Add.1, para. 10; CAT/C/MEX/CO/7, para. 28; CAT/C/RWA/CO/2, para. 38; CAT/C/LKA/CO/5, para. 15; CAT/C/TKM/CO/2, para. 9; and CAT/C/COL/CO/5, para. 10. GE.21-12084