CCPR/C/113/D/2079/2011 any pertinent explanation from the State party, the Committee decides to give due weight to the author’s allegations. Accordingly, it concludes that the author’s rights under article 9, paragraph 1, of the Covenant were also violated. 8.7 Having come to a conclusion regarding violation of the author’s rights under article 7 of the Covenant, the Committee decides not examine his claims under article 10, paragraph 1, separately. 8.8 The Committee finally notes that the author’s allegations that he was denied his right to see his family and relatives while in prison or to exchange correspondence with them. The Committee recalls its jurisprudence whereby it states that prisoners shall be allowed under necessary supervision to correspond with their families and reputable friends on a regular basis without interference,10 as stipulated in the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners11 which also provides for communication “both by correspondence and by receiving visits” (see rule 37). Noting that the State party has not specifically refuted the author’s allegations regarding his first two years of imprisonment, the Committee concludes that the facts, as submitted by the author, reveal a violation of the author’s rights under article 17, paragraph 1, of the Covenant. 9. The Human Rights Committee, acting under article 5, paragraph 4, of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, is of the view that the facts before it disclose a violation by the State party of article 7; article 9, paragraph 1; article 14, paragraph 3 (g); and article 17, paragraph 1, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 10. In accordance with article 2, paragraph 3, of the Covenant, the State party is under an obligation to provide Sapardurdy Khadzhiev with an effective remedy by, inter alia: (a) conducting a thorough and effective investigation into his pretrial detention and subsequent imprisonment; (b) providing him with detailed information on the results of the investigation; (c) prosecuting, trying and, if confirmed, punishing those responsible for the violations committed; and (d) providing adequate reparation including compensation to the author for the violations suffered. The State party is also under an obligation to take steps to prevent similar violations in the future. 11. Bearing in mind that, by becoming a party to the Optional Protocol, the State party has recognized the competence of the Committee to determine whether there has been a violation of the Covenant and that, pursuant to article 2 of the Covenant, the State party has undertaken to ensure to all individuals within its territory and subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognized in the Covenant and to provide an effective remedy when it has been determined that a violation has occurred, the Committee wishes to receive from the State party, within 180 days, information about the measures taken to give effect to the present Views. The State party is also requested to publish the present Views and to have them widely disseminated. 10 11 8 See communication No. 74/1980, Estrella v. Uruguay, Views adopted on 29 March 1983, para. 9.2. Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, adopted by the First United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, held in Geneva, Switzerland, in 1955, and approved by the Economic and Social Council in its resolutions 663 C (XXIV) of 31 July 1957, and 2076 (LXII) of 13 May 1977.