A/69/44 (b) Take all necessary measures to ensure that all human rights defenders are able to conduct their work and activities freely and effectively; (c) Investigate promptly, thoroughly and impartially all allegations of harassment, arbitrary arrest, denial of adequate medical treatment and torture or illtreatment of human rights defenders, including those listed above, prosecute and punish appropriately those found guilty, and provide the victims with redress; (d) Release from detention human rights defenders who are imprisoned and in detention in retaliation for their human rights work. Investigation and prosecution of acts of torture and ill-treatment (9) The Committee is deeply concerned at the failure of the authorities to carry out prompt, effective and independent investigations into allegations of torture and ill-treatment by public officials, including in the cases of Erkin Musaev, Batyrbek Eshkuziev, Bahrom Ibragimov, Davron Kabilov, Ravshanbek Vafoev, Ruhiddin Fahrutdinov, Gayrat Mehliboev, Rustam Usmanov, Vahit Gunes, Zahid Umataliev, Norboy Kholjigitov and Yusuf Jumaev. While noting the responses of the State party to cases of alleged violations of the Convention, the Committee reiterates its concern that the State party presented extensive detail on the alleged crimes committed by the complainants and not on any State party investigations into these allegations of torture (arts. 12, 13 and 16). The State party should provide further specific information regarding the steps taken to investigate the instances of alleged torture and ill-treatment raised by the Committee. The State party should provide the Committee with current data on the number of complaints received alleging torture and ill-treatment by law enforcement and other public officials, the number investigated by the State party, any prosecutions brought and any resulting convictions and sentences. The State party should also provide the Committee with data on cases in which officials were subjected to disciplinary measures for failure to investigate complaints of torture or ill-treatment adequately or for refusal to cooperate in investigating any such complaint. Definition of torture and amnesties for torture (10) The Committee remains concerned that, because the definition in article 235 of the criminal code restricts the prohibited practice of torture to the actions of law enforcement officials and does not cover acts by “other persons acting in an official capacity”, including those acts that result from the instigation, consent or acquiescence of a public official, it does not contain all the elements of article 1 of the Convention. The Committee welcomes the information that the Supreme Court issued decisions in 2004 and 2008 indicating that courts should use the definition of torture in article 1 of the Convention, but is concerned at reports that judges, investigators and law enforcement personnel continue to apply only the criminal code. The Committee is further concerned that the State party continues to award amnesties to individuals who have been convicted of violating article 235 of the criminal code (arts. 1 and 4). The Committee reiterates its previous recommendation that the State party adopts in its criminal code a definition of torture that reflects all of the elements contained in article 1 of the Convention. The State party should ensure that persons who act in an official capacity, as well as officials who consent to or acquiesce in torture perpetrated by third parties, are classified under the law as perpetrators of torture rather than, as is presently the case, persons who aid and abet torture. The practice of granting amnesties to persons convicted of torture or ill-treatment should be abolished, as outlined by the Committee in its general comments Nos. 2 (2007) on the implementation of article 2 by States parties and 3 (2012) on the implementation of GE.14-12596 83