CAT/C/68/D/818/2017 12 of the Convention.17 However, the Committee takes note of the State party’s argument that all the claims made by the complainant, including the allegations of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, were thoroughly examined by the domestic courts in proceedings in which all the evidence requested by the parties was produced, that the claims were reviewed by higher courts, that the decision is not unreasonable and that there is therefore no reason to argue that the judges who conducted the proceedings were biased. In view thereof, the Committee considers that the State party has met its obligation to proceed to a prompt and impartial investigation of the complainant’s allegations of torture or cruel treatment, in accordance with article 12 of the Convention. 8.6 Finally, the Committee notes the complainant’s claims that, despite her repeated requests, she did not receive medical assistance. The Committee observes that these claims appear to coincide with the testimony of the police officer who stated that the complainant “had requested the assistance of an ambulance” upon her departure from the police station (see footnote 9). The Committee is of the view that the failure to respect this guarantee falls under articles 2 and 11 of the Convention (see para. 7.2). The Committee recalls its jurisprudence concerning certain basic guarantees that must be applied to all persons deprived of their liberty in order to prevent them from being subjected to torture or cruel treatment, including the right of detainees promptly to receive independent legal and medical assistance.18 The Committee also recalls its concluding observations on the sixth periodic report of Spain, according to which “the State party should guarantee the right of all detainees […] to be promptly examined by an independent doctor”.19 The Committee added that it was concerned about “reports of difficulties in obtaining medical treatment in police custody and shortcomings in the quality and accuracy of forensic examinations” and recommended that the State party “take all necessary measures to guarantee that all detainees are given thorough and impartial medical examinations and that forensic examinations are accurate and of a high standard, and that victims are able to obtain medical evidence to support their allegations”. 20 In the absence of information from the State party on this point, the Committee finds that the State party has failed to comply with its obligations to provide medical assistance as one of the guarantees required under articles 2 (1) and 11 of the Convention, the latter read alone and in conjunction with article 2. 21 9. In the light of the foregoing, the Committee, acting under article 22 (7) of the Convention, concludes that the facts before it disclose a violation of article 2 (1) of the Convention, read in conjunction with article 16; article 11, read alone and in conjunction with article 2; and article 16. 10. The Committee urges the State party to (a) provide the complainant with full and adequate redress for the suffering inflicted on her, including compensation for material and moral damages and means of rehabilitation; and (b) take the necessary measures, including the adoption of administrative measures against those responsible, and give precise instructions to police officers at police stations, to prevent the commission of similar offences in the future. Pursuant to rule 118 (5) of its rules of procedure, the Committee invites the State party to inform it, within 90 days of the date of the transmittal of the present decision, of the steps it has taken to respond thereto. 17 18 19 20 21 GE.20-00488 Rakishev and Rakishev v. Kazakhstan (CAT/C/61/D/661/2015), para. 8.7; and Ushenin v. Kazakhstan (CAT/C/60/D/651/2015), para. 7.5. Aarrass v. Morocco, para. 10.3; E.N. v. Burundi, para. 7.6; and Ndarisigaranye v. Burundi, para. 8.4. CAT/C/ESP/CO/6, para. 10. Ibid., para. 19. See also Aarrass v. Morocco, para. 10.3. 7