CAT/C/55/D/522/2012 violated, given that Burundi accepted the competence of the Committee to receive and consider such complaints under article 22. Thus, by submitting an individual communication to the Committee against the State of Burundi, the complainant merely exercised his right to obtain redress, which is recognized by Burundi itself. 5.8 The complainant also reiterates all his arguments on the merits. Issues and proceedings before the Committee Consideration of admissibility 6.1 As required under article 22, paragraph 5 (a), of the Convention, the Committee has ascertained that the same matter has not been, and is not being, examined under another procedure of international investigation or settlement. 6.2 The Committee notes that the State party challenges the admissibility of the complaint on the grounds of a failure to exhaust domestic remedies, inasmuch as a criminal case for torture was opened as a result of the complaint lodged by the complainant on 9 February 2012 and registered with the Bujumbura court of major jurisdiction on 26 March 2012 under case No. 7271/ME. The Committee notes that the State party has indicated that the proceedings are still pending, but it has provided no other information or detail which might help the Committee to ascertain what progress has been made and to judge how effective the investigation might be, despite the fact that the case was brought more than three years ago and concerns events that took place five years ago. The Committee further notes that the complainant has stated that, upon verification, he learned that the case number mentioned by the State party relates to another person’s case. The State party has neither denied nor responded to this point. The Committee finds that, in the circumstances, the inaction of the competent authorities has made it unlikely that any remedy that might provide effective reparation can be initiated and that, in any event, the domestic proceedings have been unreasonably lengthy. Accordingly, the Committee considers that it is not precluded from considering the communication under article 22, paragr aph 5 (b), of the Convention. 6.3 In the absence of any obstacle to the admissibility of the complaint, the Committee proceeds to its consideration of the merits of the claims submitted by the complainant under articles 1, 2 (para. 1), 11, 12, 13, 14 and 1 6 of the Convention. Consideration of the merits 7.1 The Committee has considered the complaint in the light of all the information made available to it by the parties, in accordance with article 22, paragraph 4, of the Convention. 7.2 The Committee notes that, according to the complainant, he was arrested on 1 July 2010 by officials of the National Intelligence Service without being informed of the reasons for his arrest; that, while being taken to the National Intelligence Service offices, he was beaten with, among other things, a rifle butt; that, when he arrived at the National Intelligence Service offices at approximately 6 p.m., he lost consciousness upon being struck on the head with a stone; that during an interrogation that lasted six hours he was kicked and beaten by Intelligence Service officials and Burundian National Police officers using clubs, rifles and belts. The officers hit the complainant on different parts of the body, including his feet, face, shoulders and genitals, causing bruising and bleeding. In addition, a National Intelligence Service official cut off part of his ear lobe. The complainant was then handcuffed and locked in a lavatory measuring 1.5m by 3m on National Intelligence Service premises, even though he was in pain; he remained there for five days without water, food, contact with the outside world or medical care of any kind. He was forced to drink the water 12/15 GE.15-16176