CCPR/C/113/D/2054/2011 against the City Court decision was rejected by the Osh Regional Court on 15 March 2007. The Judicial Collegium of the Supreme Court on Criminal Cases and Administrative Offences, upon further appeal, on 26 September 2007, revoked the Osh Regional Court decision and returned the case for a new examination to the Osh City Court. On 15 June 2007, the Osh City Court issued a ruling rejecting as unfounded the author’s appeal against the action of the Prosecutor’s Office and the decision of 6 February 2006 to terminate the investigation into the police officers. The author’s subsequent appeal of that ruling was rejected on 2 August 2007 by the Judicial Collegium of the Osh Regional Court on Criminal Cases and Administrative Offences. The Judicial Collegium of the Supreme Court on Criminal Cases and Administrative Offences confirmed the latter decision on 31 October 2007. No further appeal is possible, in accordance with article 96 of the Constitution. 4.2 The State party submits that, on 26 November 2005, the investigation was assigned to the Prosecutor’s Office of Osh City. It also submits that in the course of the investigation the six cellmates of the deceased had been questioned and that they had testified that no violence had been perpetuated against him by the police officers or by the cellmates themselves and that he had stated that he wanted to commit suicide. They also stated that when they woke up at around 6 a.m. on 20 November 2005, they saw the author’s brother sitting on the toilet cutting his own throat. They called the guards, who opened the door of the cell and carried him out. An ambulance arrived and took him to the hospital. In the course of the investigation the ambulance workers were also questioned. They testified that they had arrived at 6:20 a.m. on 20 November 2005, examined the victim, stopped the bleeding and transported him to the hospital, and that he was in a serious condition. Furthermore, the investigators questioned the person who had filed the complaint against the author’s brother and the wife of that person; they testified that they had not seen the author’s brother since 27 October 2005, that they had not visited him in detention and that they had not delivered any products to him. No cutting instruments were found during the examination of the scene. 4.3 The State party submits that the conclusion of the forensic medical examination, dated 30 November 2005, stated that the body of the victim showed two cuts on the throat that had damaged the skin, soft tissues, veins and certain muscles, a cut on the left wrist, a cut on the left knee and bruises on the stomach, left arm and right leg. The death resulted from blood loss in the internal organs as a result of the bleeding from the throat wounds. On 16 January 2006, another forensic medical examination was ordered, which concluded that the neck wounds could have been self-inflicted, but stated that it was not possible to determine whether that was the case. 4.4 On an unspecified date, the Prosecutor’s Office issued a ruling terminating the criminal investigation against the cellmates of the author’s brother, since there was no evidence of a crime. An internal investigation by the Ministry of Internal Affairs had also been initiated. Following that investigation, on 12 December 2005, the Head of the Internal Affairs Directorate in Osh issued a reprimand against one police officer who was on duty at the time of the event and a severe reprimand against the Chief of the police station, citing bad organization of the work of the station. On 9 February 2006, the case was forwarded for further investigation to the Investigative Department of the Internal Affairs Directorate in Osh. On 21 February 2006, the criminal case against the employees of the Osh City Hospital, who provided medical assistance to the author’s brother, was discontinued since no crime was found to have been committed by them. A forensic handwriting expert issued a conclusion, dated 15 August 2006, stating that the suicide note found on the cigarette pack in the cell was written by the author’s brother. On 1 August 2006, the criminal investigation into the death of the author’s brother was discontinued on the ground that the investigators could not find an individual who could be charged with the crime. 7

Select target paragraph3