details as to offenders, victims and the factual elements of ill-treatment charges; (d)The fact that, owing to perceived constitutional difficulties arising from the division of powers between federal and Länder authorities, measures taken at the federal level to enhance compliance with the Convention are not applicable to relevant activities of the Länder. Thus, the comprehensive federal rules regarding forcible return by air, while applicable to returns carried out by the Federal Border Police (Bundesgrenzschutz), are not applicable to returns carried out by Länder authorities; (e)The legal controls and training provided to private security companies utilized to provide security to certain detention facilities at Frankfurt-am-Main international airport. D. Recommendations 92. The Committee recommends that: (a) The State party take all appropriate measures to ensure that criminal complaints lodged against its law enforcement authorities are resolved expeditiously, in order to resolve such allegations promptly and avoid any possible inference of impunity, including in cases where counter-charges are alleged; (b) The State party create a central point to assemble relevant nationwide statistical data and information on areas covered by the Convention, request such data and information from the Länder authorities or undertake such other measures as may be necessary to ensure that the State party’s authorities, as well as the Committee, are fully apprised of these details when assessing the State party’s compliance with its obligations under the Convention; (c) The State party take such measures as are appropriately within its power with respect to the authorities of the Länder to ensure the adoption and general application of measures which have proven efficacious at the federal level in improving compliance with the Convention, such as the federal rules on forcible return by air; (d) The State party comprehensively group together its criminal provisions relating to torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; (e) The State party provide the Committee with details on how many cases of extradition or removal subject to receipt of diplomatic assurances or guarantees have occurred since 11 September 2001, what the State party’s minimum requirements are for the content of such assurances or guarantees and what measures of subsequent monitoring it has undertaken in such cases; (f) The State party clarify for the Committee (i) whether all complaint facilities and avenues of legal redress (including State assumption of responsibility for the acts of its agents) that are available against members of the law enforcement authorities are applicable to the employees of private security companies engaged by the State party; and (ii) what kind of training is provided to such employees on issues arising under the Convention; (g) The State party offer, as a routine practice, medical examinations both before all forced removals by air and, in the event that they fail, thereafter; (h) The State party consider making more active use of the Convention’s extradition mechanisms with respect to German nationals who are alleged to have engaged, or to be complicit, in acts of torture abroad or in which German nationals are alleged to be victims; (i) The State party make all efforts to ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention . 93. The Committee requests that the State party provide, within one year, information in response to the Committee’s recommendations in paragraph 92 (a), (b), (e) and (f) above . 94. The Committee, considering that Germany has provided information concerning the implementation of the Convention during the period covered by the third and fourth periodic reports, recommends that the State party submit its fifth periodic report on 30 October 2007. LATVIA* 95.The Committee considered the initial report of Latvia (CAT/C/21/Add.4) at its 579th and 582nd meetings, held on 13 and 14 November 2003 (CAT/C/SR.579 and 582), and adopted the following conclusions and recommendations. A. Introduction 96.The Committee welcomes the initial report of Latvia, which was prepared in accordance with the form and contents of initial reports of States parties. It regrets, however, that the report, due on 13 May 1993, was submitted with a nine-year delay. The Committee acknowledges in this regard the difficulties encountered by the State party during its political and economic transition and hopes that in the future it will comply fully with its obligations under article 19 of the Convention. 97.The Committee also welcomes the additional information provided in writing by the State party and that by the high-level delegation in the introductory remarks and in the detailed answers to the questions raised, which demonstrate the State party’s willingness to establish an open and fruitful dialogue with the Committee. B. Positive aspects