and recognizance be increased. (g) All detainees should be effectively guaranteed the ability to challenge the lawfulness of the detention before an independent court, e.g. through habeas corpus. (h) Confessions made without the presence of a lawyer and that are not confirmed before a judge should not be admissible as evidence. Video and audio taping of all persons present during proceedings in interrogation rooms should be expanded throughout the country. Situation during visit in 2005 (See E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.6) Steps taken in previous years (See A/HRC/4/33/Add.2 and A/HRC/7/3/Add.2) China’s domestic legislation did not provide for habeas corpus or any other legal recourse to challenge arrest and pretrial detention before an independent court. • • CPL article 43 prohibited the extortion of confessions by torture or the threat of torture, but not the use of confessions extracted through torture as evidence before courts The Government acknowledged the pervasiveness of torture for the purpose of extracting confession and the SPP • • 2006: Article 75 of the Public Order Administration Punishment Law of the National People’s Congress Standing Committee (effective 1 March 2006) prohibits the use of evidence obtained by torture only when it is used as the basis of a criminal charge The SPP announced the gradual nationwide implementation of audiovideo recording of interrogations of criminal suspects, estimated to be in Information received on steps taken since December 2007/current situation Non-governmental sources: There is no provision under Chinese law requiring individuals to be brought promptly before an independent judicial authority for an assessment of the lawfulness of their arrest. House arrests (Ruanjin, literally soft arrests) are increasingly used at the discretion of the police and without legal procedure. House arrests often exceed the detention limits prescribed by the CPL, and persons deprived of their liberty have no access to a judge to challenge their detention; According to information received, socalled black detention sites outside of legal procedures are located at the outskirts of Beijing. • Non-governmental sources: Article 96 of the CPL provides for access to a lawyer only after initial interrogation; while the use of evidence obtained through torture as the basis for a criminal charge is prohibited, such evidence may still be admissible during the proceedings • Confessions made without the presence of a lawyer and obtained under torture continue to be relied on in Court. When suspects or their A/HRC/10/44/Add.5 page 10 Recommendation (E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.6)