CCPR/C/130/D/2843/2016 him from the protection of the law and deprived him of his right to be recognized as a person before the law, in violation of article 16 of the Covenant. 8.11 In view of the above, the Committee will not consider separately the claims based on the violation of article 23 (1) of the Covenant.35 8.12 The author also invokes article 2 (3) of the Covenant, which requires States parties to ensure that individuals have accessible, effective and enforceable remedies for asserting the rights recognized in the Covenant. The Committee recalls the importance it attaches to the establishment by States parties of appropriate judicial and administrative mechanisms for addressing claims of violations of the rights guaranteed under the Covenant.36 It refers to its general comment No. 31 (2004), which states that a failure by a State party to investigate allegations of violations could in and of itself give rise to a separate breach of the Covenant. 8.13 In this case, although the author reported the disappearance of her husband to the competent authorities several times, the State party did not carry out a comprehensive and thorough investigation into the disappearance and the author received no information. Furthermore, the fact that it is legally impossible to initiate judicial proceedings since the promulgation of Ordinance No. 06-01 continues to deprive Sadek Rsiwi and the author of access to an effective remedy, given that the Ordinance prohibits using the justice system to shed light on the most serious crimes, including enforced disappearance. 37 The Committee finds that the facts before it disclose a violation of article 2 (3), read in conjunction with articles 6, 7, 9 and 16 of the Covenant, in respect of Sadek Rsiwi, and of article 2 (3), read in conjunction with article 7 of the Covenant, in respect of the author. 9. The Committee, acting under article 5 (4) of the Optional Protocol to the Covenant, is of the view that the facts before it disclose a violation by the State party of articles 6, 7, 9 and 16 of the Covenant, and of article 2 (3), read in conjunction with articles 6, 7, 9 and 16 of the Covenant, in respect of Sadek Rsiwi. It also finds a violation of article 7, read alone and in conjunction with article 2 (3) of the Covenant, in respect of the author. 10. Pursuant to article 2 (3) (a) of the Covenant, the State party is under an obligation to provide the author with an effective remedy. This requires it to make full reparation to individuals whose Covenant rights have been violated. In the present case, the State party is obliged to: (a) conduct a prompt investigation that is effective and thorough, impartial and independent, and transparent into the disappearance of Sadek Rsiwi and to provide the author with detailed information about the results of its investigation; (b) to release Sadek Rsiwi immediately if he is still being held incommunicado; (c) in the event that Sadek Rsiwi is deceased, to hand over his remains to his family in a dignified manner, in accordance with the cultural norms and customs of the victims; (d) prosecute, try and punish those responsible for the violations committed; and (e) provide adequate compensation to the author and to Sadek Rsiwi, if he is alive, and provide appropriate satisfaction. Notwithstanding the terms of Ordinance No. 06-01, the State party should ensure that it does not impede enjoyment of the right to an effective remedy by victims of crimes such as torture, extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearance. It is also under an obligation to take steps to prevent similar violations in the future. To that end, the Committee is of the view that the State party should review its legislation in mind of its obligation under article 2 (2) of the Covenant and, in particular, repeal the provisions of the aforementioned Ordinance that are incompatible with the Covenant, to ensure that the rights enshrined in the Covenant can be enjoyed fully in the State party. 35 36 37 GE.21-03102 Boudjema v. Algeria, para. 8.12; and Bouzeriba v. Algeria (CCPR/C/111/D/1931/2010), para. 8.10. Allioua and Kerouane v. Algeria (CCPR/C/112/D/2132/2012), para. 7.11. CCPR/C/DZA/CO/3, para. 7. 11