CAT/C/31/D/188/2001 Page 7 Substance of the complaint 3.1 The complainant maintains that the Tunisian Government has breached the following articles of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment: Article 1. The practices described above, such as “falka”, the “roast chicken” position, “balanco”, the “chair”, etc., to which the complainant was subjected, constitute acts of torture. Article 2, paragraph 1. It is alleged that the State party not only failed to take effective measures to prevent torture, but even mobilized its administrative machinery and, in particular, its police force as an instrument of torture against the complainant. Article 4. It is alleged that the State party has not ensured that all the acts of torture to which the complainant has been subjected are offences under its criminal law. Article 5. It is alleged that the State party has instituted no legal proceedings against those responsible for torturing the complainant. Article 11. It is alleged that the authorities have not used their supervisory powers to prevent torture; instead, specific instructions have been given that torture is to be applied. Article 12. It is alleged that the State party has not carried out an investigation of the acts of torture committed against the complainant. Article 13. It is alleged that the State party has not effectively upheld the complainant’s right to lodge a complaint with the competent authorities. Article 14. It is alleged that the State party has ignored the complainant’s right to make a complaint and has thereby deprived him of his right to redress and rehabilitation. Article 15. It is alleged that the complainant was sentenced in 1992 and 1995 to prison sentences on the basis of confessions obtained as a result of torture. Article 16: The repressive measures and practices described above, such as solitary confinement, violation of the right to medical care and medicine and the right to send and receive mail, restriction of family visits, house arrest and harassment of his family, applied by the State party against the complainant constitute cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment. 3.2 The complainant also alleges that his right to practise his religion while in detention, his freedom of movement and his right to work were infringed by the administrative supervision measures applied against him, as was his right to continue his studies. He seeks redress for the harm inflicted on him and on his family, including cessation of the daily harassment of his family by the local police, and requests that they be granted passports.