CAT/OP/MLI/1 persons detained for more than 5 years without a valid committal warrant. It appears that the files for some of these cases have quite simply been lost and that the persons concerned are now in a legal limbo, since they have no hope of being either tried or freed. In many cases, sentences are handed down de facto, before the accused has even been tried. Observing the presumption of innocence and not sentencing detainees until they have been tried are requirements in every State governed by the rule of law. The tendency to place persons in detention while awaiting trial, including for minor misdemeanours such as the theft of telephone cards, mobile phones, property, etc., is one of the main causes of prison overcrowding in Mali (see paragraphs 47–48 below), since almost 60 per cent of the country’s prison inmates are being held in pretrial detention. Furthermore, the Subcommittee noted that pretrial detainees do not possess a copy of their committal warrant, which is kept by the issuing judge. The length of detention is monitored by prison staff and cannot be checked by the detainee, who is not informed in writing of the date of his or her next court appearance. The Subcommittee also noted the absence of oversight by the judges concerned of the enforcement of sentences since they rarely visited the prisons. 30. The Subcommittee recommends: (a) The use of pretrial detention only in cases of the most serious offences and crimes, possibly taking due account of repeat offences, and the systematic use in other cases of alternatives to deprivation of liberty, as set forth in the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Non-custodial Measures (the Tokyo Rules)6 and in application of article 128 of the Code of Criminal Procedure; (b) Monitoring by the courts of persons in pretrial detention in order to ensure that they are not held for longer than is legally permissible, and an immediate review of the cases of all persons who have been in pretrial detention for more than 3 years, in application of article 135 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Furthermore, persons who are sentenced should receive ongoing monitoring by the courts to guarantee adherence to the duration of the deprivation of liberty; (c) The release of anyone who has been in pretrial detention for a period equal to or greater than the maximum possible prison sentence for the offence that led to the person’s detention. Complaints mechanism 31. The Subcommittee did not hear of any official complaints mechanism in the places of detention visited, as demonstrated by the silence of detainees and the prison authorities on this topic. The only way to lodge a complaint appears to be through the system of cell and yard bosses, about which the Subcommittee has numerous reservations (see paragraphs 57–60 below). 32. The Subcommittee recommends that all detainees be notified of their right to submit direct, confidential complaints to the competent prison authorities and to higher ranking authorities. Any person detained must be notified of this right in a language that he or she understands at the time of detention. Furthermore, noticeboards and posters bearing information on the matter should be put in visible places around the establishment. The Subcommittee recommends that the right to lodge complaints be guaranteed in practice and that complaints be forwarded to the competent authorities without restriction, promptly considered and a decision be made and communicated to the complainant without delay. Persons who have lodged complaints should not suffer reprisals or the threat of reprisals. The competent 6 8 Adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in resolution 45/110 of 14 December 1990. GE.14-41827