CAT/C/61/D/654/2015 of September. During the two interviews with the investigating judges, he bore clear traces of torture. Yet the two judges failed to report the crime and to order an expert medical opinion. 3.12 As he lodged his complaint with the Court of First Instance in Tunis on 3 June 2011 and the investigation was closed on 16 February 2012, it cannot be concluded that an investigation of the facts was immediately initiated or that it was prompt and impartial, since more than 21 years elapsed from the date on which the facts were first reported without an effective investigation and prosecution of the alleged perpetrators. The legal definition adopted by the investigating judge was a simple offence of violence. The trial was opened in April 2012 and the hearings have already been postponed on 15 occasions. This demonstrates a lack of will on the part of the judiciary to render justice to the author of the complaint. A prompt and impartial examination of the allegations (article 13) 3.13 The complainant adds that a violation of article 13 of the Convention should be found on the same grounds as those invoked in the case of article 12. The right to redress (article 14) 3.14 With regard to article 14, the complainant points out that a number of procedural safeguards pertaining to his detention were not respected. Moreover, the Tunisian State, having deprived him of criminal proceedings as set out above, deprived him, in addition, of the prescribed legal procedures for obtaining compensation for material and non-material damages due to serious crimes such as torture. 3.15 On 15 March 2012, Rached Jaïdane submitted a claim for compensation to the Ministry of Human Rights and Transitional Justice, which no longer exists today, based on the amnesty certificate issued to him after the revolution as a former unjustly convicted political prisoner. He never received a reply. Moreover, he has not benefited from any rehabilitation measure, and is still suffering from both physical and psychological aftereffects owing to the lack of any proper treatment for his condition. 10 3.16 In January 2013, Rached Jaïdane was recruited as a mathematics teacher at the Hay Khadra secondary school in Tunis, on the basis of Act No. 2012-4 of 22 June 2012, which grants amnestied former political prisoners or their successors in title the right to apply for a public service post within six months. The complainant underscores, however, that such recruitment is not sufficient to fulfil the State party’s obligations under article 14 of the Convention. Non-utilization of statements obtained through torture (article 15) 3.17 Referring to the Committee’s jurisprudence, 11 the complainant states that he was placed in pretrial detention and sentenced to 26 years’ imprisonment on the basis of his confession. Notwithstanding his allegations of torture, the conditions under which the official record was filed were never verified by the authorities and the confessions were not rendered null and void. Cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (article 16) 3.18 It is firmly maintained that the violence inflicted on Rached Jaïdane constitutes torture, in accordance with the definition contained in article 1 of the Convention. However, should the Committee consider that this characterization is not applicable, it is maintained as a subsidiary contention that the abuse suffered by the victim definitely constitutes cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. 10 11 GE.17-16785 Certificate in the case file. Communication No. 193/2001, P.E. v. France, para. 3.4. See also communication No. 514/2012, Niyonzima v. Burundi, decision adopted on 21 November 2014. 9