A/69/44 The Committee recommends that the State party amend the criminal procedure code to provide judges with competence to apply less restrictive alternatives to detention during habeas corpus hearings, including guarantees of appropriate conduct that would allow the accused to be released pending trial. The State party should ensure in law and in practice that the right of detainees to a lawyer of their choice in habeas corpus hearings is respected. The State party should also ensure that all habeas corpus hearings are public and accessible to independent monitors. The State party should consider revising its legislation so that any detainee, whether detained on criminal or administrative grounds, must be brought to a habeas corpus hearing within 48 hours of deprivation of liberty. Evidence obtained through torture (16) The Committee is concerned about numerous allegations that persons deprived of their liberty were subjected to torture or ill-treatment for the purpose of compelling a forced confession and that such confessions were subsequently admitted as evidence in court in the absence of a thorough investigation into the torture allegations. The Committee is further concerned at the failure of the State party to provide the Committee with information on cases in which judges have deemed confessions inadmissible on the grounds that they were obtained through torture, or with data on the number of cases in which judges have sought investigations into allegations made by defendants that they confessed to a crime as a result of torture (art. 15). The State party should ensure that any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made, by: (a) Including the prohibition explicitly in all relevant articles of the criminal procedure code; (b) Ensuring that judges ask all defendants in criminal cases whether or not they were tortured or ill-treated in custody and order independent medical examinations whenever necessary; (c) Ensuring in law that judges are mandated to order an investigation when provided with prima facie evidence of torture during habeas corpus hearings; (d) Providing the Committee with information on any cases in which confessions were deemed inadmissible on the grounds that they were obtained through torture and indicating whether any officials have been prosecuted and punished for extracting such confessions. Independent complaints mechanism (17) Notwithstanding the efforts of the State party to investigate complaints of torture, such as through instruction 334 of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, special staff inspection units and the Parliamentary Ombudsperson, the Committee is concerned that, according to numerous reports, these bodies have not been effective in combating torture and lack independence (art. 13). The State party should ensure in law and in practice that every person has the right to complain of torture or ill-treatment to an effective and fully independent mechanism that will investigate and respond promptly and should ensure that the Parliamentary Ombudsperson is fully independent. Independent monitoring of places of detention (18) While noting the affirmation of the State party that all places of detention are monitored by independent national and international organizations and that they would 86 GE.14-12596