A/HRC/7/3/Add.7 page 21 Issue Custody registers • • • Evidence obtained under torture • • Habeas corpus Situation observed Registers are either inexistent or lack most important information Not all persons deprived of their liberty are registered Insufficient registers blur accountability and render external scrutiny more difficult. Torture cases are easier to be hidden Many allegations of confessions under torture, which were admissible during court proceedings Reports about non-action of judges, prosecutors and other members of the judiciary vis-à-vis allegations of torture • Whereas the Criminal Procedure Code contains a provision allowing to challenge the validity of detention, the Special Rapporteur has received numerous indications that this procedure is not used in practice • Women held in Social Welfare Centres have no access to judicial review of their detention Recommendations • Ensure the proper maintenance of custody registers • Confessions made by persons in custody without the presence of a lawyer and that are not confirmed before a judge shall not be admissible as evidence against the persons who made the confession • Serious consideration should be given to video and audio taping of interrogations, including of all persons present • The burden of proof should shift to the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the confession was not obtained under any kind of duress. • All detainees should be effectively guaranteed the ability to challenge the lawfulness of the detention before an independent court, e.g. through habeas corpus proceedings