E/CN.4/1990/17 page 74 jurisdiction irrespective of whether the abusing official belongs to the military. The rights of civilians by their very nature can best be protected by an open procedure in a civilian court. Treatment of such cases by military tribunals may easily lead to the suspicion of a cover-up. In arresting and interrogating civilians who are suspected of criminal behaviour, law-enforcement officials carry out an essentially civilian task and should therefore be accountable to civilian authorities. Whatever the correctness of interpreting article 91 of the Constitution on the basis of juridico-historical considerations may be, the Special Rapporteur feels that the rule of law is best served by taking this article in its literal sense. 250. Another problem that requires attention is that of the many detainees who stay without legal assistance for a considerable period of time. None of the five detainees interviewed by the Special Rapporteur during his visit to the central penitentiary had a lawyer, although they had been arrested during the second half of July and were under formal investigative detention since the beginning of August. According to the Constitution, the State is under an obligation to provide an attorney for the poor. In these specific cases doubt was expressed by the authorities about the inability of the persons concerned to pay a lawyer of their own. The Special Rapporteur was informed that a pilot project had recently been started, funded by the Government, to comply with this constitutional obligation. The Special Rapporteur expresses the hope that this project will be expanded in the near future, so that every detainee will be able to have legal assistance from the moment of his arrest. 251. In the great majority of the allegations received by the Special Rapporteur, it was stated that a detainee was blindfolded immediately after his arrest and was kept in that situation until he was presented to the competent judge. Although blindfolding as such cannot be considered a form of torture, it very often is an indication that torture may be practised and that the blindfold is applied to prevent recognition of the interrogators by the detainee. In addition it should be pointed out that blindfolding creates an atmosphere of uncertainty and anxiety and puts the detainee under pressure. Blindfolding of detainees should therefore be absolutely forbidden and punishable by law. 252. Although previous allegations also referred to torture practised in official prisons, the Special Rapporteur has no indication that this is still the case. During his interview with detainees in the central penitentiary no complaints were made about torture or ill-treatment by the present prison administration. The prison, where general conditions seemed to be rather liberal and easygoing, is nevertheless severely overcrowded (holding between 1,500 and 1,800 inmates, whereas it was originally designed for a population of 1,000). It was also said that the food was poor in quality and insufficient in quantity. Although the Constitution (art. 86) states that a detainee who has not yet been tried should be kept separate from persons who are serving a prison sentence, no such separation is applied in the central penitentiary. The authorities admitted that this was not in conformity with the law but stated that it was impossible, for financial reasons, to change that situation in the foreseeable future. Since, however, plans were said to be under way to alleviate the urgent problem of overcrowding, they should be developed in such a way as to ensure, to the greatest extent possible, the achievement of a situation such as the one prescribed by the Constitution and the various international human rights instruments.