CAT/C/32/D/202/2002 Page 6 3.3 The complainant argues that she exhausted domestic remedies, as in the last letter written to the DDP her representative had indicated that if the DPP did not respond to his letter, he would assume that domestic remedies were deemed to have been exhausted. The complainant’s representative did not receive a response. The State party’s submission on admissibility and merits: 4.1 By submission of 26 April 2002, the State party challenges the admissibility and merits of the complaint. It invokes Section 762 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which at the time of the complainant’s imprisonment, provided for pre-trial detention. Under the applicable terms of this Act, the court decides, at the request of the police, whether the person charged should be held in pre-trial detention. The order must fix a period for the pre-trial detention, which must be as short as possible and may not exceed four weeks. The period may be extended, but not by more than four weeks at a time. An order for detention may be appealed to a superior court. Finally, it states that pre-trial detention must be terminated, if necessary by court order, when the charges are dropped or the conditions for detention no longer exist. If the court finds that the investigation is not pursued with adequate expediency or continued pre-trial detention is not reasonable, the court must terminate it. 4.2 The State party furnishes Section 770 of the Administration of Justice Act, which provides for detention in solitary confinement. Under this Section, it is necessary to have reasonable grounds for suspecting that the person charged has committed an offence, which is subject to public prosecution and, under the law, may result in imprisonment for at least one year and six months. Proportionality is a precondition for any decision on initiation and continuation of pre-trial detention in solitary confinement. The State party notes that the provisions on pre-trial detention in solitary confinement were substantially amended by Act No. 428 of 31 May 2000. The new provisions entered into force on 1 July 2000. The purpose of the amendment was to limit the resort to, and duration of, pre-trial detention in solitary confinement; it provides for more specific criteria for initiating and continuing solitary confinement,