PART B: Substantive Norms on Torture in the African Regional Human Rights System i. Safeguards The Fair Trial241 and Robben Island Guidelines242 emphasise the interrelatedness of procedural safeguards and the right to be free from torture and other forms of ill-treatment. In the case of Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights and INTERIGHTS v. Egypt, the Commission held that the deprivation of procedural safeguards, denying detainees access to a lawyer, for example, constitutes a violation of Article 5 of the Charter. In its decision, the Commission held that ‘[i]t should be understood by the Respondent State that there is a positive obligation on them to provide access to independent legal assistance under the Charter, inherent in the international prohibition of torture and ill-treatment’. The Commission also found that the rights of detainees to undergo a medical examination as well as to be brought promptly before a judge are also ‘vital aspects of the prevention and deterrence of torture and other ill-treatment’. Similarly, the Commission has found that detention without charge constitutes an ‘arbitrary deprivation of liberty’ and therefore violates Article 6.244 In Zegveld and Ephrem v. Eritrea,245 the Commission found a violation of Article 6 and observed that all detained persons ‘must have prompt access to a lawyer and to their families’, and that ‘their rights with regards to physical and mental health must be protected’.246 The Commission added that the lawfulness of detention must be determined by a court of law ‘or other appropriate judicial authority’, and it should be possible to challenge the grounds that justify prolonged detention on a periodic basis. These observations amount to a requirement that domestic law should allow for habeas corpus or similar proceedings. Suspects should be charged and tried ‘promptly’, and States should comply with the fair trial standards set out in the Fair Trial Guidelines.247 In this case, the Commission found a violation of Article 7(1), which encompasses various elements of the right to have one’s case heard. Taking steps to ensure that the legality of detention may be reviewed in habeas corpus or similar proceedings are an important procedural safeguard. In cases involving torture or similar violations of physical integrity, the best evidence is 241 Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Assistance in Africa, ACHPR / Res.41(XXVI) 99 (1999) [hereinafter ‘Fair Trial Guidelines’]. 242 The Robben Island Guidelines, reproduced in full in Annex 4 to this Handbook. 243 ACHPR, Egyptian Intiative for Personal Rights and INTERIGHTS v. Egypt, Comm. No. 334/06, paras. 177, 179 and 183. 244 ACHPR, Constitutional Rights Project and Another v. Nigeria, Comm. No. 102/93, 24th Ordinary Session (31 October 1998), para. 55. 245 ACHPR, Zegveld and Ephrem v. Eritrea, Comm. No. 250/2002. 246 Ibid., para. 55. 247 Ibid., para. 56. 63