(b) The unnecessary secrecy and arbitrariness surrounding the time of execution, allegedly in order to respect the privacy of inmates and their families. In particular, the Committee regrets the psychological strain imposed upon inmates and families by the constant uncertainty as to the date of execution, as prisoners are notified of their execution only hours before it is due to take place. The State should take all necessary measures to improve the conditions of detention of persons on death row, in order to bring them into line with international minimum standards. (20) The Committee is seriously concerned at the restrictions imposed on the enjoyment of legal safeguards by death row inmates, in particular with respect to: (a) The limitations imposed on death row prisoners concerning confidential access to their legal representatives, including the impossibility to meet with them in private, while on appeal requesting retrial; the lack of alternative means of confidential communication and the lack of access to State defence counsel after the final sentence is handed down; (b) (c) sentence; The lack of a mandatory appeal system for capital cases; The fact that a retrial procedure or a request for pardon do not lead to suspension of the execution of (d) The absence of a review mechanism to identify inmates on death row who may be suffering from mental illness; (e) The fact that there has been no case of commutation of a death sentence in the last 30 years. The State party should consider taking measures for an immediate moratorium on executions and a commutation of sentences and should adopt procedural reforms which include the possibility of measures of pardon. A right of appeal should be mandatory for all capital sentences. Furthermore, the State party should ensure that its legislation provides for the possibility of the commutation of a death sentence where there have been delays in its implementation. The State party should ensure that all persons on death row are afforded the protections provided by the Convention. Prompt and impartial investigations, right to complain (21) The Committee is concerned at: (a) The lack of an effective complaints system for persons in police custody. It regrets the fact the 2006 Penal Law does not introduce an independent body with such a mandate. The Committee notes the lack of information on the Board of Visitors for Inspection of Police Detention Cells, to be established in June 2007; (b) The lack of authority of the Board of Visitors for Inspection of Penal Institutions to investigate cases or allegations of acts of torture or ill-treatment; (c) The lack of independence of the Review and Investigation Panel on Complaints by Inmates in Penal Institutions, as its secretariat is staffed by personnel of the Ministry of Justice, and its limited powers to investigate cases directly, as it cannot interview prisoners and officers, nor does it have direct access to any related documents; (d) The statutory limitations on the right of inmates to complain and the impossibility of defence counsel assisting clients to file a complaint; (e) Reports of adverse consequences to inmates as a result of having filed a complaint and of law suits rejected on the grounds that the term for claiming compensation had expired; (f) The lack of information on the number of complaints received, as well as the number of investigations initiated and completed and their outcome, including information on the number of perpetrators and sentences received. 64