CCPR/C/123/D/2831/2016 2.10 A few days before the author’s extradition,1 a group of 15 or so hooded men entered his cell in Aranjuez prison in Madrid in the middle of the night, dragged him to a storeroom and beat him until another prisoner raised the alarm. He was then taken to another cell with only a bare mattress and left alone until the following morning. The next day, the author informed the chief of security of the prison about the incident. The chief of security informed him that the intervention had taken place “on orders from outside”. 2.11 On 13 June 2008, the author was transferred to the United States on a special flight. 2.12 On 20 November 2008, the author was sentenced to 30 years in prison by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. This sentence was upheld by the Court of Appeals of the Southern District of New York for the Second Circuit on 21 September 2011 and by the United States Supreme Court on 14 May 2012. An appeal challenging the legality of the sentence was rejected on 14 July 2014. A petition filed on 24 May 2013 requesting a procedural review for violation of the right to a defence and the illegality of the extradition, given the absence of an extradition order, was rejected on 9 March 2015 by the Court of Appeals of the Southern District of New York. 2.13 The author is being held in a special wing, known as the Communications Management Unit, of Terre Haute prison in Indiana, United States. According to the author, the prison is dubbed “Guantánamo North”. 2.14 On 20 December 2010, the author sent a letter to one of the judges of the National High Court of Spain, in which he claimed to have been subjected to acts of violence in early June 2008. In response, his lawyer was informed of the authority competent to hear such claims. On 8 March 2011, the author sent a letter to the judge responsible for handling cases of prison violence. The judge in question did not take any action. 2.15 The author requested a copy of the extradition request from the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The Clerk informed the author on 28 July 2014 and 18 May 2016 that his case file did not contain the document in question. 2.16 On 1 June 2016, the author submitted an implementation impact assessment to the Criminal Division of the National High Court of Spain, arguing that he had been sentenced to 30 years in prison and that, given his age, the imposition of such a sentence was at variance with the diplomatic assurances provided by the United States when the extradition request was being processed.2 The complaint 3.1 The author explains that the period of time that has elapsed between his extradition and the submission of the communication is attributable to his transfer to the United States and his placement in solitary confinement in the special prison wing known as the Communications Management Unit, a regime that imposes extreme restrictions on communications. In addition, it has taken several years, until 2014, to obtain the relevant documents. 3.2 He claims a violation by Spain of articles 2 (1) and (3), 7, 9 (1) and (5), 10 (1), 14 (1), 15 (1) and 26 of the Covenant. 3.3 The author asserts that he was never notified of the decision of the Council of Ministers of 6 June 2008 and that no appeal may be made against such a decision. He therefore considers that these acts constitute a violation of his rights under article 2 (3) of the Covenant. 3.4 The author claims that he was subjected to acts of torture during his detention in Spain, a few days before his extradition, and that the State party has not followed up on his complaints. He considers that this failure to act constitutes a violation of his rights under article 7, read in conjunction with articles 2 (3), 9 (1) and 10 (1) of the Covenant. 1 2 GE.18-13666 The author does not know the exact date. The author does not provide information on the outcome of the implementation impact assessment. 3