unreasonably prolonged. The Committee was therefore of the view that there were no further domestic remedies which had to be exhausted before the communication was declared admissible. 4.2 With regard to article 5 (2) (a), the author's assertion that the same matter had not been submitted to any other procedure of international investigation or settlement had not been contested by the State party. 5. On July 1981, the Human Rights Committee therefore decided: (fl) That the communication was admissible; (Ô) That, in accordance with article 4 (2) of the Op­ tional Protocol, the State party be requested to submit to the Committee, whhin six months of the date of the transmittal to h of its decision, written explanations or statements clarifying the matter and the remedy, if any, that may have been taken by it; the State party is re­ quested, in this connection, to enclose copies of any court orders or decisions of relevance to the matter under consideration; (d) That having regard to the concern expressed in Ana Maria Teti Izquierdo's letter of 8 June 1981, the State party be requested again to inform the Committee of Mario Teti's state of heahh and to ensure that he was given suitable medical treatment. 6. The time-hmit for the State party's submission under article 4 (2) of the Optional Protocol expired on 19 February 1982. No submission has been received from the State party, in addition to those received by the Committee prior to the decision on the admissibihty of the communication. 7.1 The Human Rights Committee has considered the present communication in the light of all informa­ tion made avaüable to it by the parties, as provided in article 5 (1) of the Optional Protocol. The Committee bases hs views on the foUowing facts which are not in dispute or which are unrepudiated or uncontested by the State party except for denials of a general character of­ fering no particular information or explanation: Events prior to the entry into force of the Covenant 7.2 First case. Mario Alberto Teti Izquierdo was arrested on 7 December 1970. On 11 December 1970 he was committed for trial by the first examining magistrate on charges of "conspiracy to commit an of­ fence", "attempts to overthrow the Constitution" and "being in possession of explosives". On 3 May he was provisionaUy released. 7.3 Second case. On 24 May 1972 Mario Alberto Teti Izquierdo was rearrested for aUeged involvement in subversive activities. He was kept incommunicado for two months and subjected to Ul-treatment. On 15 September 1972 he was again committed for trial by the third military examining magistrate on charges involv­ ing a series of offences, namely "attempts to overthrow the Constitution amounting to conspiracy followed by preparatory acts", "conspiracy to commit an offence" and "use of a fraudulent pubhc document". From 1972 to 1976 Mario Alberto Teti Izquierdo had access to three defence lawyers of his choice. Dr. Wilmar OUvera in 1972, Dr. Alba Deh'Acqua from January 1973 to December 1975 and Dr. Mario Deh'Acqua from January 1976 to October 1976. All these lawyers left Uruguay, allegedly because of harassment by the authorities. Events subsequent to the entry into force of the Coven­ ant 1.4 Concerning the second case. The mihtary court of the first instance sentenced him to nine years' rigorous imprisonment less the time spent in preventive detention. On 12 May 1976 the case came up on appeal before the Supreme Court of Mihtary Justice. In Oc­ tober 1976 Mario Alberto Teti Izquierdo was assigned a court-appointed military defence councel. Dr. Juan Barbé. On 3 November 1977 Mario Alberto Teti Iz­ quierdo was sentenced to 10 years' rigorous imprison­ ment less the time spent in preventive detention. It would appear that he would have served the whole of his sentence in May 1982. 7.5 Concerning the first case. On 21 Aprh 1980 he was sentenced at first instance to eight years' rigorous imprisonment and to two to four years' precautionary measures. On 30 June 1980 this case came up on appeal before the Supreme Court of Military Justice. 7.6 In June 1980 Mario Alberto Teti Izquierdo was forced to sign a statement in connection with new charges which were brought against him. 7.7 Since October 1976 he has been unable to have the assistance of counsel of his own choice. 7.8 After a vish of the International Red Cross to Libertad prison in February/March 1980, Mario Alberto Teti Izquierdo was subjected to physical attacks and threats of death. In August 1980 he was moved to a punishment cell and held in solitary confinement. He was then in a very poor physical and psychological state of heahh. 7.9 On 26 September 1980 he was moved to another detention estabhshment for interrogation in connection with his alleged involvement, together with other de­ tainees, in operations aimed at reactivating a subversive organization (the "Tupamaros" movement) from within the Libertad prison. In this connection Mario Alberto Teti Izquierdo faces new charges. His family was unable to obtain information about his whereabouts unth May 1981, when he was brought back to Libertad. From September 1980 to May 1981 he was held incommunicado. When Mario Alberto Teti Iz­ quierdo was transferred from Libertad he weighed 80 kilograms, and after his return only 60 kilograms. 8. As regards the allegations of ill-treatment made by the author, the State party has adduced no evidence that these allegations have been investigated. 9. The Human Rights Committee, acting under ar­ ticle 5 (4) of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Pohtical Rights, is of the view that the facts as found by the Committee, in so far as they continued or occurred after 23 March 1976 (the 135