CAT/C/57/D/531/2012 Court of Major Jurisdiction (tribunal de grande instance), where a hearing was scheduled for 21 October 2015.5 6.4 On 5 June 2015, the complainant informed the Committee that his sister, who lives in Algeria, had been threatened and that her house had been damaged, unknown persons having blocked all the entrances with concrete and armoured doors. 6.5 On 27 November 2015, a reminder was addressed to the State party, in which reference was made to the letter dated 5 February 2015 from the above-mentioned rapporteur, asking the State party to inform the Committee of the measures it had taken pursuant to the rapporteur’s request. 6.6 On 8 February 2016, the complainant informed the Committee that, on 8 January 2016, the French National Court on the Right of Asylum had granted him refugee status, along with his wife and three children. Issues and proceedings before the Committee Consideration of admissibility 7.1 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. 7.2 The Committee notes that the State party has contested the admissibility of the complaint on the grounds of non-exhaustion of domestic remedies, since it considers the decision of the Guelma Chief Prosecutor to discontinue proceedings, which was submitted by the complainant, to be a forgery. The Committee notes, however, that, other than this assertion, the State party has not responded in any way to the facts presented by the complainant. The Committee finds that, under the circumstances, the inaction of the competent authorities has made it unlikely that any remedy that might provide effective relief can be initiated. The Committee therefore finds that it is not precluded from considering the communication under article 22 (5) (b) of the Convention. Consideration of the merits 8.1 The Committee has examined the complaint in the light of all information made available to it by the parties, in accordance with article 22 (4) of the Convention. 8.2 The Committee notes the complainant’s claim that, because of his work as an investigating judge, he was the victim of a plot and of intimidation and threats to his physical integrity by various officials of the State party between 2009 and 2011. The complainant has alleged, moreover, that on 4 January 2011 he was the victim of acts of torture by the Inspector General, who sought to force him to admit that he had signed the application to release the 160 billion Algerian dinars that the complainant, in his capacity as investigating judge, had ordered to be blocked in the context of an investigation into embezzlement. 8.3 The Committee has taken note of the State party’s submission, in which it gives a different account of the facts, without, however, responding to the allegations documented by the complainant. The Committee further notes that the complainant has provided a certain number of documents, notably a copy of the complaint he addressed to the Guelma Chief Prosecutor on 23 January 2011, in which he relates his assault by the Inspector General on 4 January 2011. The State party has not denied these claims. 5 6 The complainant has provided no further updates in this regard. GE.16-13805