CAT/C/NAM/CO/2 9. The State party should expedite the adoption of the bill on prevention and combating of torture, ensuring that the definitive version of the law includes a definition of torture that is in accordance with the provisions of the Convention, and that the acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment are fully considered in the law. Fundamental legal safeguards 10. The Committee is concerned at the fragmented and incomplete recognition of fundamental legal safeguards in the State party’s legislation, which relies heavily on standards established by case law that do not encompass all fundamental legal safeguards. That is particularly the case with regard to the rights of persons deprived of liberty: (a) to be informed of their rights in a language they understand; (b) to promptly contact a family member or any other person of their choice; (c) to have prompt access to a medical examination by an independent doctor; and (d) to be brought before a court within a maximum of 24 hours. Furthermore, the Committee is concerned at reports that numerous persons are held in custody beyond 48 hours and do not effectively benefit from the assistance of a lawyer from the outset of detention (art. 2). 11. The State party should ensure that all fundamental legal safeguards are guaranteed by appropriate means of regulation and not merely by jurisprudence. The State party should also ensure that all detainees are afforded, in law and in practice, all fundamental legal safeguards from the outset of detention, according to international standards, including: (a) The right to be promptly informed, in a language they understand, of their rights, the reasons for arrest and the charges laid against them; (b) The right to promptly contact a family member or any other person of their choice; (c) The right to have prompt and confidential access to a qualified and independent lawyer, or to free legal aid when needed; (d) Access to a medical examination by an independent doctor; (e) The right to be promptly brought before a competent, independent and impartial court within a maximum of 48 hours; (f) The right to have the legality of their detention challenged through an habeas corpus procedure and to have their detention recorded in a register at the place of detention and in a central register of persons deprived of liberty. National human rights institution 12. While taking note of the explanation concerning budgetary restraints provided by the delegation, the Committee remains concerned at the lack of information regarding the implementation of the Ombudsman’s recommendations, most of which do not require expenditure by the State. The Committee is also concerned at the reportedly limited mandate of the Office of the Ombudsman, particularly in terms of its capacity to carry out sufficient, regular and unannounced visits to places of deprivation of liberty and to recruit its own personnel (art. 2). 13. The State party should amend the Ombudsman Act of 1990 in order to enhance the mandate of the Office and give it greater independence, particularly with regard to conducting regular unannounced visits to places of deprivation of liberty. The State party should ensure that the Office of the Ombudsman has adequate financial resources to recruit its own staff and effectively discharge its functions, in accordance with the principles relating to the status of national institutions for the promotion and 3