The Prohibition of Torture and Ill-treatment in the African Human Rights System: A HANDBOOK FOR VICTIMS AND THEIR ADVOCATES pre-trial process. Most importantly, national law and practice must prohibit incommunicado detention; must ensure that the use of ‘unauthorised places of detention’ is prohibited and punished; that the relevant written records are kept, and that habeas corpus is observed (allowing challenges to the lawfulness of detention).558 The importance of an independent and effective national complaints mechanism is emphasised, as is the role of an independent judiciary, legal profession, medical profession and NGOs. Acknowledging the long term value of training and awareness-raising, the Guidelines also require States to engage in human rights training of law enforcement and security personnel and awareness-raising of the general public.559 Conditions of detention may also amount to torture or ill-treatment. By dealing in some detail with conditions of detention, the relevance of the Guidelines to the work of the Special Rapporteur is underscored. Among other duties, States are required to ensure the separation of pre-trial detainees from those already convicted,560 and of juveniles and women from adult male detainees.561 Both of these issues are central to the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Prisons and Conditions of Detention in Africa. Similarly, States are called upon to reduce over-crowding by encouraging non-custodial sentences for minor crimes.562 Part III of the Guidelines addresses the needs of victims . It calls on States to ensure that victims of torture and their families are ‘protected from violence’ and it also enjoins States to ‘offer reparations’ to victims ‘irrespective of whether a successful criminal prosecution’ has been brought. Finally, States should ensure medical care, access to rehabilitation as well as compensation and support to victims and ‘their dependents’.563 As resolutions of the Commission, these Guidelines are not binding, but serve a recommendatory role. However, their authority has been enhanced by Commission findings that invoke them. For example, in Rights International v. Nigeria the Resolution on the Right to Recourse and Fair Trial was relied upon to interpret the fair trial right in Article 7(1)(c) of the Charter to include the right of an individual to be informed of the reason for his or her arrest or detention.564 The Commission did the same in the more recent case of Gabriel Shumba v. Zimbabwe.565 In the case Ibid., paras. 21-32. Ibid., paras. 45-46. Ibid., para. 35. Ibid., para. 36. Ibid., para. 37. Ibid., para. 50. ACHPR, Rights International v. Nigeria, Comm. No. 215/98, 26th Ordinary Session (15 November 1999), paras. 28-29. 565 ACHPR, Gabriel Shumba v. Zimbabwe, Comm. No. 288/04, para. 172. 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 130