A/HRC/7/3/Add.2 page 145 724. Therefore, any statement taken before 1 June 2005 in the absence of a defence counsel during a case that is pending as of 1 June 2005, can be renewed in the presence of a defence counsel on various grounds. For instance, such a renewal can be requested on the basis of an objection that the statement was not made of free will or that it was extracted under torture, ill-treatment, pressure, force or other prohibited methods. Renewal can also be ordered by the court if it is not convinced that the statement or confession is indeed made of free will. This aspect is also given due consideration by the Court of Cassation. In addition, provisions of the new Criminal Procedure Code apply to statements taken following the decision of reversal. On the other hand, if there is an allegation that a statement was obtained by use of torture against a suspect or an accused before 1 June 2005, it would be investigated thoroughly by the relevant authorities. 725. Recommendation (l) stated: A system permitting an independent body, consisting of respected members of the community, representatives of legal and medical professional organizations and persons nominated by human rights organizations, to visit and report publicly on any place of deprivation of liberty should be set up as soon as possible. 726. According to non-governmental sources, while over the past few years there have been fewer reported cases of torture in police or gendarmerie custody (and in particular a reduction of reports of torture in anti-terror departments of the police), there are still insufficient safeguards in place to prevent a possible future rise in cases. Lack of independent monitoring of places of detention has been repeatedly remarked upon by domestic and international human rights NGOs and lawyers, with future ratification of the OPCAT seen as extremely important. Information is awaited on plans for strengthening the independent monitoring powers of the Human Rights Boards. 727. In addition to previously reported information (e.g. A/HRC/4/33/Add.2, paras. 653-658, and E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2, para. 333), the Government cited that CPT has stressed in a recent report that “it is more than ever the case that detention by law enforcement agencies is currently governed by a legislative and regulatory framework capable of combating effectively torture and other forms of ill-treatment by law enforcement officials” (CPT/Inf (2006) 30, para. 12). 728. Recommendation (m) stated: The Government should give serious consideration to inviting the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to establish a presence in the country capable of implementing a thorough system of visits to all places of detention meeting all the standards established by the ICRC for such visits. 729. According to non-governmental sources, noting the standing invitation to Special Procedures, and a subsequent request by the Special Rapporteur on the independence of the judges and lawyers, an invitation to him would be an extremely constructive and valuable step on the part of the Government. Concerns about the independence of the judiciary in Turkey have been repeatedly voiced by human rights groups and the concerns expressed cannot be said to have been laid to rest with the 2004 abolition of the State Security Courts.