CCPR/C/122/D/2265/2013 months. The authors emphasize that there is a direct link between incommunicado detention and ill-treatment and that prolonged incommunicado detention can itself amount to torture, as recognized in treaty body jurisprudence.11 7.6 The authors note that the Special Rapporteur on torture, the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances and the Committee against Torture have acknowledged that the practice of torture in Nepal is widespread and systematic.12 They also note that the 35-day limit for bringing claims under the Compensation Relating to Torture Act has been found by the Human Rights Committee to be “flagrantly inconsistent with the gravity of the crime”.13 7.7 Mr. Sharma has received interim relief, a provisional measure that does not amount to fair and adequate compensation for the harm he suffered as a result of the grave violations of his human rights. Nor does interim relief amount to reparation, rehabilitation, satisfaction, restitution or a guarantee of non-repetition. His case is not an exception in Nepal, as the Committee has noted.14 7.8 The authors confirm that their case has been submitted to the National Human Rights Commission but that the submission did not enable them to access justice or obtain redress. Moreover, the National Human Rights Commission, in the Committee’s view,15 should not be considered a judicial remedy. 7.9 The authors reiterate that the transitional justice mechanism is still non-existent and that they cannot be asked to exhaust a remedy that, because it does not exist, cannot be exhausted. The authors believe that it has been long enough since the events in question for the State party to have provided them with justice and redress. Further submissions from the State party 8. In notes verbales dated 24 June 2014 August and 11 December 2014, the State party informed the Committee that the Act on the Commission on Investigation of Disappeared Persons, Truth and Reconciliation, 2071 (2014), had been adopted by Parliament in April 2014 and that the truth and reconciliation commission and the enforced disappearance commission would be established shortly. It provided a brief description of the main provisions of the Act and held that it was a landmark instrument to address the issue of past human rights violations committed by both State and non-State actors. It also submitted that the bills to criminalize torture and enforced disappearance had been drafted and were in the process of resubmission to Parliament. The criminal justice system could not provide full remedy to the victims of the armed conflict without the transitional justice mechanisms. The authors’ claims would therefore be addressed fully after the establishment of those mechanisms. Issues and proceedings before the Committee Consideration of admissibility 9.1 Before considering any claim contained in a communication, the Committee must, in accordance with rule 93 of its rules of procedure, decide whether the communication is admissible under the Optional Protocol. 9.2 The Committee has ascertained, as required under article 5 (2) (a) of the Optional Protocol, that the same matter is not being examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement. 9.3 With respect to the requirement of exhaustion of domestic remedies, the Committee notes the State party’s arguments that the authors have not exhausted domestic remedies, as 11 12 13 14 15 10 The authors refer to G.K. v. Switzerland (CAT/C/30/D/219/2002), para. 6.3, and Sedhai et al. v. Nepal (CCPR/C/108/D/1865/2009), para. 8.3. The authors refer to Official Records of the General Assembly, Sixty-seventh Session, Supplement No. 44 (A/67/44 (2012), annex XIII. The authors refer to Maharjan et al. v. Nepal (CCPR/C/105/D/1863/2009), para. 7.6. See CCPR/C/NPL/CO/2, para. 5 (b). The authors refer to Giri et al. v. Nepal (CCPR/C/101/D/1761/2008), para. 6.3.