A/HRC/34/54/Add.2 did not receive medical attention and continued to live among the general prison population despite the risk of contagion. 65. Where they are present, doctors lack specialized training in penitentiary care or medical forensic expertise. Infirmaries, where they exist, are primitive and lack basic medical equipment and sufficient medicines, so detainees rely on their families for the provision of drugs. Transport to a hospital is at the discretion of guards, who are not trained to assess the need for medical care. 66. The Special Rapporteur observed that no medical examinations were conducted upon admission or transfer to a detention centre, nor is there regular screening of all detainees. 3. Inadequate family visits 67. Family visits take place once a month for convicted prisoners and once a week for remand detainees, but many relatives live far away and visit infrequently. In practice, especially in cases prosecuted under the Prevention of Terrorism Act, visiting time is severely restricted to a few minutes because the processing of visitors (including invasive body searches, security screening, documentation and registry) count as part of the allocated time. 68. The Ministry of Prison Reforms, Rehabilitation, Resettlement and Hindu Religious Affairs informed the Special Rapporteur that it would purchase body and parcel scanners to avoid invasive body searches. C. 1. Safeguards and prevention Right not to be arbitrarily detained and to be free from torture 69. Article 13 (1) and (2) of the Constitution guarantees freedom from arbitrary arrest, detention and punishment. The article includes the right of every person held in custody, detained or otherwise deprived of personal liberty to be brought before the judge of the nearest competent court in accordance with the procedure established by law and to not be further held in custody, detained or deprived of liberty except upon, and in terms of, the order of a judge made in accordance with the procedure established by law. 70. The Code of Criminal Procedure Act contains procedural safeguards to protect the integrity of a person arrested or detained, including the right to be informed of the nature of the charge or allegation upon which he or she is arrested (art. 23) and to be presented to a magistrate without undue delay and within 24 hours (arts. 36 and 37 and art. 65 of Police Ordinance No. 16 of 1865). Officers in charge of police stations are further required to report to the relevant magistrates all cases of persons arrested without a warrant (art. 38). If an investigation cannot be completed within 24 hours, only the magistrate may decide to detain a suspect in custody pending investigation and for a maximum of 15 days (art. 115 (1) and (2)). 71. The Special Rapporteur notes with concern, however, that neither the Penal Code nor the Code of Criminal Procedure Act specifies that an arrest warrant must be authorized by a judge, giving the police extraordinary powers of arrest and increasing the risk of arbitrary detention and of torture and ill-treatment. Moreover, the Special Rapporteur received credible testimonies that suspects are often first detained for interrogation at official or unofficial places of detention without being registered during the initial hours or days and not brought before a judge, especially detainees under the Prevention of Terrorism Act who are held incommunicado. This facilitates the perpetration of torture and other illtreatment and can in itself constitute such treatment. 12