an obligation not to disregard the specific claim by the author that his prolonged stay on death row amounts to a violation of his fundamental rights; and that we are thus bound to rule on the claim. taken to give effect to the Committee’s Views. The State party is also requested to publish the Committee’s Views. Consequently, taking into account the circumstances of this case, in which the author of the communication has spent 15 years on death row, I am of the view that this fact alone constitutes cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and that article 7 of the Covenant has been violated. APPENDIX Dissenting opinion by Committee members Mr. Hipólito Solari-Yrigoyen and Mr. Edwin Johnson I disagree with the majority view that it is unnecessary in the present case for the Committee to reconsider its jurisprudence, which has, to date, held— wrongly, in my view—that prolonged detention on death row does not, in itself, constitute a violation of article 7 of the Covenant. Accordingly, the facts before the Committee reveal violations by the State party both of article 6 and of article 7 of the Covenant. In accordance with article 2, paragraph 3, of the Covenant, the State party is under an obligation to provide the author with an effective remedy, including commutation of his death sentence and the possibility of his being granted his freedom. Although the Committee has rightly concluded that there has been a violation of article 6, it is my view that, in a case in which the death sentence was imposed, we have Communication No. 915/2000 Submitted by: Mrs. Darmon Sultanova (represented by counsel) Alleged victims: The author, the author’s deceased sons, Mr. Uigun and Oibek Ruzmetov, and author’s husband, Mr. Sobir Ruzmetov State party: Uzbekistan Date of adoption of Views: 30 March 2006 Subject matter: Death sentence after unfair trial, torture, unavailability of habeas corpus, inhuman treatment in custody, violation of the right to privacy. Uzbek nationals, born in 1970 and 1965 respectively. Her sons were sentenced to death by the Tashkent Regional Court on 24 July 1999 (Uigun) and 29 July 1999 (Oibek).The sentences were upheld on appeal by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan on 20 September 1999. The whereabouts of her sons was unknown at the time of submission of the communication. Mrs. Sultanova also acts on behalf of her husband, Sobir Ruzmetov, an Uzbek national born in 1935, who at the time of submission of the communication was serving a five-year prison term in colony UYA 64/61 in Karshi, Surkhandarya region, pursuant to a judgement handed down by the Khazorasp District Court on 28 May 1999 and upheld on appeal on 2 November 1999 (title of the court not provided). Mrs. Sultanova claims that she is a victim of violations by Uzbekistan of article 9, and in light of her sons’ execution, of article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.1 She further claims that her sons are the victims of violations by Uzbekistan of articles 7, 9, 14, paragraphs 1, 2, 3 (b), (d), (e) and (g), and in light of their execution, of article 6. She also claims that her husband is a victim of violations of articles 9, 10, paragraph 1, and 14, paragraphs 1, 2, 3 (b), (d), (e) and (g). The author is represented by counsel. Substantive issues: Right to life, torture, degrading treatment or punishment, arbitrary detention, right to be brought promptly before a judge/officer authorized by law to exercise judicial power, right to communicate with counsel, right to examine witnesses, interim measures to avoid irreparable damage to the alleged victim, violation of obligations under the Optional Protocol, unlawful interference with one’s privacy. Procedural issues: — Articles of the Covenant: 2, para. 3; 6; 7; 9; 10, para. 1; 14, paras. 1, 2, 3 (b), (d), (e) and (g); and 17 Articles of the Optional Protocol: 1, 2 and 5, paras. 2 (a) and (b) Finding: Violation (arts. 2, 3 (b), (d), (e) and (g); 6; 7; 9, paras. 1 and 3; 14, para. 1; and 17) 1.1 The author of the communication is Darmon Sultanova, an Uzbek national born in 1945. She submits the communication on her own behalf, on behalf of her sons, Uigun and Oibek Ruzmetov, also 1 The Optional Protocol entered into force for the State party on 28 September 1995 (accession). 53