CCPR/C/128/D/2710/2015 office or to a court. For this reason, the communication should be considered inadmissible as unsubstantiated. 4.4 On 26 December 2011, Osh City Court acquitted the author of the attempted murder charges under article 97, part 2 (6), (9) and (15), read in conjunction with article 28, and under article 233, parts 1 and 3, of the Criminal Code, due to lack of evidence that he had committed the aforementioned crimes. However, the Court found the author guilty of intentional destruction and damage to property and of participation in mass riots. The author was sentenced under article 174, part 2, and article 233, part 2, of the Criminal Code, to four and five years respectively of imprisonment. Consequently, by virtue of article 59 of the Criminal Code, the author was cumulatively sentenced to eight years of imprisonment. 4.5 On 21 February 2012, the Appeal Collegium on Criminal Cases, of Osh Regional Court, revoked the Osh City Court judgment in its acquittal part, found the author guilty under article 97, part 2 (6), (9) and (15), read in conjunction with article 28, of the Criminal Code, and sentenced him to 12 years of imprisonment. Thus, ultimately, under article 59 of the Criminal Code, the author was cumulatively sentenced to 16 years of imprisonment. 4.6 By virtue of article 4 of the Amnesty Act of 22 July 2011, in connection with the twentieth anniversary of the independence of Kyrgyzstan, the remaining period of his sentence was reduced by one fifth. 4.7 On 28 June 2012, the Supreme Court upheld the decision of Osh Regional Court of 21 February 2012. 4.8 The State party further submits that in line with the Criminal Procedure Code of Kyrgyzstan, the legality and validity of courts’ judgments are subject to examination by the higher courts. The evidence and materials collected during the investigation and trial of criminal cases are examined and verified in accordance with the criminal procedure legislation. Verification of the lawfulness and validity of the decisions of the courts in the author’s case was conducted through supervisory review proceedings, during which the case materials were given a proper legal assessment. The Supreme Court decision in respect of the supervisory review proceedings is final and not subject to appeal. Author’s comments on the State party’s observations on admissibility and the merits 5.1 On 13 June 2017, the author commented on the State party’s observations. 5.2 The author notes that the State party’s generalized information confirms the superficial and perfunctory character of the investigation and the State party’s failure to provide an effective remedy. In the author’s view, the State party focuses its observations on a mere enumeration of the courts’ verdicts finding the author guilty of having committed crimes under article 97 (attempted murder), read in conjunction with article 28; article 233, part 2 (mass riots); and article 174, part 2 (1) and (2) (intentional destruction and damage to property); of the Criminal Code. According to the State party’s version of the facts, the alleged crimes took place from 10 June to 17 June 2010. The author claims that the court sentence was based solely on his confession and on the victim’s testimony. 5.3 The author challenges the authorities’ version of the events as being unfounded and groundless, as demonstrated by his travel and customs documents. Notably, the author points out that according to the Prosecutor’s Office of Andijan Region in Uzbekistan and the witness testimony of T.K., it was established that: on 10 June 2010, the author crossed the Uzbek border, due to mass riots beginning in the city of Osh; on 11 June 2010, he went to T.K.’s house, and shared information about his and his relatives’ whereabouts in the Pakhtaoi refugee camp in Uzbekistan, and they all remained in T.K.’s house for four days; after that they returned to the camp and resided there until 22 June 2010, on which date they returned to Osh, in Kyrgyzstan. 5.4 The author further explains that several documents corroborate these facts: a letter from the Department of the State Customs Committee of Uzbekistan for Andijan Region certifying that, as a Kyrgyz citizen, he entered Uzbekistan on 10 June 2010 through the Dustlik customs complex in Andijan Region; an Andijan Region local government letter attesting that from 14 June to 22 June 2010 the author was in the Pakhtaoi refugee camp in the village of Yerkishlak in Jalakuduk district; the attendance sheet compiled on 22 June 4