A/70/44 76. At its fifty-fourth session, the Committee adopted decisions on the merits in respect of 13 communications. The Committee found that the forcible return of the complainants would constitute a violation by the States parties of article 3 of the Convention in its decisions on communications No. 490/2012, E.K.W. v. Finland; No. 544/2013 A.K. v. Switzerland; No. 542/2013, X. v. the Russian Federation; and No. 538/2013, Tursunov v. Kazakhstan. In communications No. 542/2013 and No. 538/2013, the Committee also found violations of article 22 of the Convention owing to the States parties’ failure to cooperate and to respect the Committee’s requests for interim measures. The Committee found that the forcible return of the complainants would not constitute a violation by the States parties of article 3 of the Convention in its decisions on communications No. 476/2011, E.C. v. Switzerland; No. 440/2010, G.A.B. v. Switzerland; No. 468/2011, Z. v. Switzerland; No. 540/2013, C.S. v. Switzerland; No. 550/2013, S.K. and others v. Sweden; No. 491/2012, E.E.E. v. Switzerland; No. 539/2013, A.B. v. Sweden; and No. 556/2013, Z. v. Sweden. 77. In its decision on communication No. 456/2011, Hernández Colmenarez and Guerrero Sánchez v. the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, the Committee found that the disappearance of a prisoner who had been serving a sentence in the Venezuelan General Penitentiary constituted an enforced disappearance and an act of torture within the meaning of article 1 of the Convention. The relatives of the disappeared person had received information from other inmates that he had been murdered, dismembered and buried within the premises of the Penitentiary as a reprisal, because he had known about illegal activities conducted by a group of prisoners with the complicity of the National Guard commander. After the disappearance, the State authorities had claimed that the victim had escaped from prison. The Committee observed that the State authorities had not provided any information regarding what steps they had taken to establish the victim’s whereabouts and that his remains had not been located and returned to his family; nor had it been determined whether the prison authorities and National Guard bore any responsibility in the matter. The Committee found that the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela had not taken effective measures to prevent acts of torture in its jurisdiction, did not conduct prompt and impartial investigation into the torture allegations and did not provide redress for the harm caused. It also found that the enforced disappearance of the victim constituted ill treatment under article 16 of the Convention in relation to the complainants. 78. The Committee found one communication, No. 606/2014, A. v. Morocco, admissible. D. Follow-up activities 79. At its twenty-eighth session, in May 2002, the Committee against Torture established the function of the Rapporteur for follow-up to decisions on complaints submitted under article 22. At its 527th meeting, on 16 May 2002, the Committee decided that the Rapporteur should engage, inter alia, in the following activities: monitoring compliance with the Committee’s decisions by sending notes verbales to States parties enquiring about measures adopted pursuant to the Committee ’s decisions; recommending to the Committee appropriate action upon the receipt of responses from States parties, in situations of non -response, and upon the receipt henceforth of all letters from complainants concerning non -implementation of the Committee’s decisions; meeting with representatives of the permanent missions of States parties to encourage compliance and to determine whether advisory services o r technical assistance by OHCHR would be appropriate or desirable; conducting, with the approval of the Committee, follow-up visits to States parties; and preparing periodic reports for the Committee on his or her activities. GE.15-13195 21/24