A/HRC/25/60/Add.2 that the conditions observed in most of these holding centers fall short of international standards, and at times amount to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. It is further reported that migrants are being forcibly tested for diseases and then deported, and are otherwise particularly vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. The Special Rapporteur expressed concern that these alleged detentions are arbitrary and thus prohibited by ICCPR article 9(1). Furthermore the Special Rapporteur is concerned that the conditions of detention reported, alleged forced medical treatment/testing, and allegations of corporal punishment all rise to the level of cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment, and are violations of the basic human rights of those detained. In turn the Government is reminded of paragraph 1 of Human Rights Council Resolution 16/23 which “Condemns all forms of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, including through intimidation, which are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever and can thus never be justified, and calls upon all States to implement fully the absolute and non-derogable prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” With regard to the reported lack of an immigration system capable of adjudicating asylum claims or granting refugee status to migrants fleeing crisis in areas such as Syria, the Special Rapporteur expressed concern that such practices constitute a violation of article 3 of the CAT. This article provides that no State party shall expel, return (refouler), or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that the person would be in danger of being subjected to torture. In this regard, paragraph 9 of General Comment No. 20 on the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, in which the Human Rights Committee states that State parties “must not expose individuals to the danger of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment upon return to another country by way of extradition, expulsion or refoulement.” The Special Rapporteur urges the Government to respond to these allegations and take meaningful action to ensure the basic human rights of migrants fleeing to Libya are recognized. Malaysia (a) AL 19/02/2013 Case No. MYS 3/2013 State reply: None to date Alleged forcible return of six ethnic Uighurs to the People‘s Republic of China. 93. The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Malaysia has not responded to this communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council. The communication referred to the alleged repatriation of six ethnic Uighurs to the People’s Republic of China, where Uighurs are frequently accused of terrorism without substantiating evidence and subjected to torture and other human rights violations. Allegedly the Malaysian police secretly transferred the asylum seekers into Chinese custody, and they were brought back to the People’s Republic of China on a chartered flight. In this context, the Special Rapporteur reiterates that article 3 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) provides that no State party shall expel, return (“refouler”), or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that the person would be in danger of being subjected to torture. In this regard, paragraph 9 of General Comment 20 on the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, in which the Human Rights Committee states that State parties “must not expose individuals to the danger of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment upon return to another country by way of extradition, expulsion or refoulement”. Furthermore, paragraph 9 of the Resolution A/RES/61/253 of the UN General Assembly urges States “not to expel, return (“refouler”), extradite or in any other way transfer a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that the person would be in danger of being subjected to torture”. The Special Rapporteur also 68