CAT/C/MAR/CO/4 international obligations, anyone who commits acts of torture, attempts to commit torture, or is complicit or otherwise participates in such acts is investigated, prosecuted and punished without the possibility of availing themselves of any statute of limitations. 6. The Committee is concerned by some of the existing legal provisions on torture, particularly those providing for the possibility of granting an amnesty or pardon to perpetrators of acts of torture. It is also concerned by the absence of a specific provision which clearly establishes that the order of a superior officer or of a public authority may not be invoked as a justification for torture and by the absence of a specific protection mechanism for subordinates who refuse to obey an order to torture a person who is in their custody (arts. 2 and 7). The State party should ensure that its laws preclude any possibility of granting amnesty to any person convicted of the crime of torture or any kind of pardon that violates the Convention. The State party should also amend its laws in order to explicitly stipulate that an order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture. The State party should establish a mechanism for the protection of subordinates who refuse to obey such an order. The State party should ensure that all law enforcement officers are informed of the prohibition of obeying such an order and are made aware of the protective mechanisms that are in place. Basic legal safeguards 7. The Committee notes that Moroccan law provides a number of basic safeguards for persons taken into custody which are designed to prevent torture. It also takes note of the existence of, among other important proposals, draft legislative amendments aimed at ensuring that a person taken into custody will have access to a lawyer more quickly. The Committee is nonetheless concerned by the restrictions placed on the application of some of those basic legal safeguards, both under existing statutory law and in practice. The Committee is particularly concerned about the fact that, at present, a lawyer may not see his or her client until the first hour after the person’s period of detention has been extended, provided that authorization has been obtained from the Crown Prosecutor-General. It is also concerned by the fact that access to the legal aid office is limited to minors and cases in which the possible sentence for a crime exceeds five years. The Committee regrets the lack of information on the practical application of other basic safeguards such as examination by an independent physician and notification of the family (arts. 2 and 11). The State party should make certain that the bills currently under consideration ensure that all suspects will have the right to enjoy, in practice, the basic safeguards provided for by law, which include their right to have access to counsel at the time of their arrest, to be examined by an independent physician, to contact a relative or friend and to be informed of their rights and the charges against them, and to be brought before a judge without delay. The State party should take the necessary steps to ensure that people have access to their lawyers as soon as they are taken into custody, without any need to obtain prior authorization, and to put in place a system for the provision of effective legal assistance free of charge, particularly in the case of persons at risk or who belong to vulnerable groups. Anti-terrorism law 8. The Committee notes with concern that Anti-Terrorism Act No. 03-03 of 2003 does not set out a precise definition of terrorism, as required in order to uphold the principle that there can be no penalty for an offence except as prescribed by law. It is also concerned by the fact that the law in question defines advocacy of terrorism and incitement of terrorism GE.11-47997 3