220. At its fourteenth session, in April 1995, the Committee examined in closed session information on allegations of systematic practice of torture in Peru which had been communicated to it by non-governmental organizations, pursuant to article 20 of the Convention. 221. The Committee considered that the information appeared to be reliable and that it contained wellfounded indications that torture was being systematically practised in Peru. The Committee invited the State party to cooperate in the examination of the information and subsequently in the confidential inquiry that it had decided to establish. The Committee is satisfied with the manner in which Peru cooperated throughout the procedure. 222. The Committee designated for the inquiry two of its members. With the agreement of the Government of Peru, the two Committee members visited Peru from 29 August to 13 September 1998. 223. The Committee completed its inquiry in May 1999 and transmitted its report with conclusions and recommendations to the Government of Peru on 26 May 1999. 224. In November 1999, the Committee decided to postpone any decision about the publication of its summary account of the inquiry. Chapter VI CONSIDERATION OF COMMUNICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 22 OF THE CONVENTION 225. Under article 22 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, individuals who claim that any of their rights enumerated in the Convention have been violated by a State party and who have exhausted all available domestic remedies may submit communications to the Committee against Torture for consideration. Forty-one out of 119 States that have acceded to or ratified the Convention have declared that they recognize the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications under article 22 of the Convention. Those States are: Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Senegal, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uruguay, Venezuela and Yugoslavia. No communication may be considered by the Committee if it concerns a State party to the Convention that has not recognized the competence of the Committee to do so. 226. Consideration of communications under article 22 of the Convention takes place in closed meetings (art. 22, para. 6). All documents pertaining to the work of the Committee under article 22, i.e. submissions from the parties and other working documents of the Committee, are confidential. 227. In carrying out its work under article 22, the Committee may be assisted by a working group of not more than five of its members or by a special rapporteur designated from among its members. The working group or the special rapporteur submits recommendations to the Committee regarding the fulfilment of the conditions of admissibility of communications or assists it in any manner which the Committee may decide (rule 106 of the rules of procedure of the Committee). Special rapporteurs may take procedural decisions (under rule 108) during inter-sessional periods, thereby expediting the processing of communications by the Committee. 228. A communication may not be declared admissible unless the State party has received the text of the communication and has been given an opportunity to furnish information or observations concerning the 38