CCPR/C/119/D/2146/2012 to prosecution. For example, in 2012, of 28 cases that were initiated, only five were sent to court. 5.7 The author further submits that he was assigned four different lawyers at different stages of the criminal case against him. All four lawyers proved to be useless and did not defend him properly. For example, Z.H., his second lawyer, demanded US$ 1,000 for her services, although she was paid by the Government. During 10 months in the pretrial detention centre, the lawyers visited the author only twice. 5.8 The courts failed to consider his release pending trial due to his medical condition. The author brought this petition several times, but the court disregarded these requests. Only once, on 8 September 2009, had the court addressed this issue by saying that the author was receiving all proper medical care at the detention facility. 5.9 The State party also failed to conduct an effective and impartial investigation into the author’s claims of torture. On 1 October 2009, the court questioned the senior investigator of the National Security Committee for Astana, T.A. This investigator testified that the author, other defendants and witnesses were never tortured or pressured in any way. As required by international standards, the State party cannot follow a formal approach in investigating claims of torture, but instead, must make every effort to conduct a thorough and effective investigation. 5.10 The author was charged on 7 February 2009. Additional charges were brought against him three months later. The initial court decision to detain him pending trial and the subsequent decision to prolong his detention was based only on the gravity of charges. The court failed to consider all other circumstances of the author’s case, including his health. 5.11 Several times during imprisonment, the author was placed in solitary confinement as a punishment. The explanation given by the prison administration was that he was prohibited from encountering other prisoners as, if he was allowed to do so, he would disseminate his “terrorist” views. Currently, the author is being held in a solitary confinement unit of the medical unit of Prison No. 166/18.19 5.12 The author’s religious freedoms were violated by the State party regularly. He was threatened for praying regularly and pressured to denounce his religion. In prison, the author is registered as a prisoner who has committed crimes based on religion. The author, in an addendum to his appeal dated 23 December 2009, complained about violations of his religious freedoms.20 5.13 The State party further claims that the author failed to exhaust all available domestic remedies, specifically, that he did not file a cassation and appeal and, thereafter, a supervisory appeal request to the Supreme Court. The provisions of the law establishing a cassation appeal came into force on 1 July 2012. The author’s communication to the Committee was submitted on 14 January 2011. The author contends, however, that his aunt did file a cassation appeal on his behalf. He personally could not file a cassation appeal, because he had 15 days to file this appeal, but the appellate court did not provide a copy of its decision dated 27 February 2010. At the same time, the author was being transported to the place of imprisonment and he could not physically prepare his cassation appeal. 5.14 Regarding a supervisory appeal procedure, the author contends that his brother and co-defendant, Z.K., did file a supervisory appeal request with the Supreme Court, which was rejected. Overall, the supervisory appeal procedure cannot be deemed as an effective domestic remedy. After the author’s aunt filed supervisory appeals with the prosecutor’s office on behalf of the author, she received two responses dated 7 December 2010 and 24 August 2011, where the prosecutor’s office refused to grant the bringing of a supervisory appeal to the Supreme Court. 5.15 The author also submits that, during his imprisonment in Facility No. 162/4, he was subjected to harsh treatment. For example, on 6 September 2011, at 5 a.m., E.S., one of the guards, along with two soldiers, stormed into the author’s cell, started yelling at him and 19 20 8 Located in Zavodskoi village in Akmola region. The author also alleges that he was pressured to drop his communication to the Committee.