techniques, such a law should explicitly prohibit all forms of treatment prohibited by article 7. […] A specific concern of the Committee is that at least some of the persons kept in administrative detention for reasons of State security … do not personally threaten State security but are kept as "bargaining chips" in order to promote negotiations with other parties on releasing detained … soldiers or the bodies of deceased soldiers. The Committee considers the present application of administrative detention to be incompatible with articles 7 and 16 of the Covenant, neither of which allows for derogation in times of public emergency. --CCPR/C/79/Add.93, paras. 19, 21 (1998). ***** The Committee against Torture has also referred to the non-derogable nature of the right to freedom from torture: [A] State party to the Convention [against Torture] … is precluded from raising before [the] Committee [against Torture] exceptional circumstances as justification for acts prohibited by article 1 of the Convention. This is plainly expressed in article 2 of the Convention. -- A/52/44, para. 258 (1997). ***** [U]nder article 2, paragraph 2, of the Convention [against Torture], no exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification for torture. --A/51/44, paras.180-222 (1997), Inquiry under Article 20. ***** The Human Rights Committee observed, in its General Comment No. 20, that prolonged solitary confinement in itself may constitute a violation of the right to freedom from torture and from cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment: [T]he Committee notes that prisoners may be segregated [in the State party] as a preventive measure for the protection of security, the maintenance of order or to 33