CAT/C/41/D/257/2004 Page 3 woken up by someone kicking him. The individual, unknown to the complainant, tried to force him to leave the hotel. The complainant explained why he was waiting there and that he was only staying for another hour. Later, the same individual, accompanied by another man, again tried to make the complainant leave the lobby1. 2.2 Shortly afterwards, two police officers arrived and shouted at the complainant, handcuffed him, and asked him to present his identity card. The police officers then took him out of the hotel; he was kicked “once or twice”. The complainant asked the police officers to stop kicking him, but he was pushed and fell to the ground. He began calling for help, and was ordered to stop; as he did not obey, he was kicked and beaten with a truncheon, until he fainted. He woke up in a patrol car, with handcuffs and shackles on his legs. He was assaulted again in the car and one of the police officers allegedly attempted to strangle him at which point he again lost consciousness. He was taken out of the car and was threatened with being shot. He woke up in a cell of the Regional Police Directorate of Chepelare; he asked for a doctor who arrived two hours later. The complainant asked him to unchain him and to give him some medication, but he said that he was only there to do an alcohol test. The complainant was later charged with hooliganism, which he claims was initiated following a threat to the police officers who mistreated him that he would sue them for their actions. 2.3 On the morning of 5 February 2003, the complainant was released whereupon he underwent medical examinations with three different medical doctors, all of whom confirmed that he had certain injuries on his body and one of whom confirmed that these injuries could have been caused at the time, and in the manner described by the complainant.2 According to the complainant, one of the doctors in question stated that he had been “advised” by the Regional Police Directorate not to provide a medical report for him. On 4 April 2003, the complainant complained about the assault to the Regional Military Prosecutor’s Office in Plovdiv3, which investigated his claim. On 23 September 2003, the Plovdiv Military Deputy-Prosecutor found 1 From the documents submitted it transpires that the individuals in question were both hotel employees. 2 Copies of medical reports are provided: 1. Report dated 5 February 2003, referring to the results of an ultrasound, “Kidneys – normal size; slight changes in the parenchyma zones and the calyxes showing contusion more on the right kidney. The rest parenchyma organs – without peculiarities. There are no free liquids into the abdomen”; 2. Report dated 5 February 2003, which states “Trauma of the iliac zone, concussion of the kidney to the right. Erizthrocytoria.”;3. Medical-forensic report, dated 12 July 2003, following a medical-forensic assessment ordered by the investigation. The doctor made the following conclusion based on the two medical reports mentioned above as well as on his own examination. “Trauma of the right iliac zone; concussion of the kidney on the right; available blood in the urine; a blood on the skin of the left armpit, as well as the left and right thigh and along the back (right iliac zone), a worn out on the skin of the left cochlea; a worn out on the skin of both wrists, and a traumatic edema on the back of the fright palm. The above mentioned traumas were caused by either a hit, to close pressing against a hard blunt object; it is possible to be caused within the same time and in the same way, the witnesses declared in their evidence.” 3 In relation to this claim, the case file contains copies of “Minutes of an Examination of witness”, during which two witnesses explained on 8 July 2003 what they had witnessed in the morning of 4 February 2003.