CAT/C/SWE/CO/2 page 4 The State party should take effective measures to ensure that all detainees are afforded fundamental legal safeguards in practice, including the right to have access to a lawyer and a doctor and the right of detained persons to inform a close relative or another third party of their choice of their situation. The Committee emphasizes that persons in custody should benefit from an effective right of access to a lawyer, as from the very outset of their deprivation of liberty and throughout the investigation phase, the whole of the trial and during appeals. Furthermore, the State party should finalize the translation of the information leaflet on fundamental rights as soon as possible and widely disseminate it to all places where a person may be deprived of his or her liberty. Detention of asylum-seekers 12. The Committee notes that positive changes have occurred in the Migration Board’s policy on reception of undocumented asylum-seekers and pre-deportation detention which have resulted in a decrease in detention rates. The Committee is, however, concerned that pre-deportation detention is common and it regrets that there is no absolute limit on the length of time that an asylum-seeker can be detained. The Committee is also concerned at information that asylum seekers who are a risk to themselves or others are sometimes placed in remand prisons. (arts. 2, 3, 11 and 16) The State party should take effective measures to ensure that detention of asylumseekers is used only in exceptional circumstances or as a measure of last resort, and then only for the shortest possible time. Furthermore, the State party should consider other placement alternatives for asylum-seekers who are in need of care that are suitable for their particular condition. Non-refoulement 13. The Committee welcomes the inclusion in the Aliens Act of a new ground for issuing a residence permit whereby an alien will normally be granted such a permit when the Committee, or another international complaints body, has found the State party to be in breach of its treaty obligations. The Committee also notes the statement by the delegation that the State party has not participated in any extraordinary renditions and that it has not obtained or tried to make use of diplomatic assurances in any case other than the cases concerning Mr. Agiza and Mr. Alzery. The Committee takes note of the extensive information presented by the State party on measures taken to implement the Committee’s decision in Agiza v. Sweden, including the issuance of visas to family members and continued visits to the prison. The Committee also notes that the requests for residence permit and compensation are currently awaiting resolution. However, the Committee regrets the lack of full implementation of the key elements in this decision, in particular an indepth investigation and prosecution of those responsible, as appropriate. It further regrets the lack of full implementation of the Views of the Human Rights Committee in Alzery v. Sweden, including the recommended remedies. (arts. 3 and 14) The State party should take all necessary measures to implement the decision of this Committee and the Views of the Human Rights Committee concerning Mr. Agiza and Mr. Alzery and provide them with fair and adequate compensation. Furthermore, the State party should undertake an in-depth investigation into the reasons for their expulsion and prosecute those responsible, as appropriate. Finally,