rehabilitation as possible by providing, inter alia, medical and psychological care, social services, and legal assistance, including reimbursement for past expenditures, future services, and legal expenses...”98 Satisfaction and the Right to the Truth 57. In some cases, particularly where a person was returned to a risk of torture or other ill-treatment outside ordinary judicial processes, a vital component of the right to redress will be an effective investigation that would determine the truth of what happened capable of leading to prosecution of the perpetrators.99 Public inquiries are particularly important in order to ensure public scrutiny of, and accountability for, acts that have occurred away from public view, in order to prevent further violations of the Convention.100 Guarantees of Non-Repetition 58. Guarantees of non-repetition, identified as an essential component of the right to reparation in General Comment 3, are equally significant for violations of Article 3. Both this Committee and the Human Rights Committee have regularly called on States to prevent similar violations in the future.101 59. Appropriate forms of guarantees will depend upon the context but may include: revising law and policy guidance that led to the offensive decision to return; training competent officials to better implement existing guidance and relevant international law as set out in the Convention; convening governmental inquiries and improving parliamentary scrutiny and oversight in order to improve transparency. 60. Given the countless instances of individuals being subjected to lengthy detention periods while awaiting transfer, the Committee should consider recommending that States parties provide redress and reparation to the individuals concerned when their transfers are found to be in violation of Article 3 and the States parties were responsible for unnecessarily prolonging the detention of the complainant. (3) Follow-up monitoring by human rights bodies 61. The second sentence of paragraph 22 broadly recommends that states parties request “independent international experts or organizations or national experts and institutions to carry out monitoring and follow-up visits to the persons concerned…” 98 CAT, Boily v. Canada, UN Doc. CAT/C/47/D/327/2007, 13 January 2012, para. 15. See also, CAT, Concluding Observations: Djibouti, UN Doc. CAT/C/DJI/CO/1, 22 Dec. 2011, para. 14 99 CAT, Concluding observations: Kenya, UN Doc. CAT/C/KEN/CO/1, 19 Jan. 2009, para. 17; CAT, Concluding Observations: Syria, UN Doc. CAT/C/SYR/CO/1, 25 May 2010, para. 18; CAT, Concluding Observations: Djibouti, UN Doc. CAT/C/DJI/CO/1, 22 Dec. 2011, para. 14; HRC, Concluding Observations: USA, UN Doc. CCPR/C/USA/CO/3/Rev.1, 18 Dec. 2006; ECtHR, El Masri v. FYRoM, App. no. 39630/09, 13 December 2012, paras 191-2. 100 ECtHR, El Masri v. FYRoM, App. no. 39630/09, 13 December 2012, para. 11 101 See e.g., CAT, Agiza v. Sweden, UN Doc. CAT/C/34/D/233/2003, 20 May 2005, para. 15; CAT, Boily v. Canada, UN Doc. CAT/C/47/D/327/2007, 13 January 2012, para. 15; HRC, Alzery v. Sweden, UN Doc. CCPR/C/88/D/1416/2005, 10 November 2006, para. 13; HRC, Valetov v. Kazakhstan, UN Doc. CCPR/C/110/D/2104/2011, 29 April 2014, para. 16; HRC, AH v. Denmark, UN Doc. CCPR/C/114/D/2370/2014, 7 September 2015, para. 10; HRC, Ali Aarrass v. Spain, UN Doc. CCPR/C/111/D/2008/2010, 30 September 2014, para. 12; HRC, Concluding Observations: USA, UN Doc. CCPR/C/USA/CO/3/Rev.1, 18 Dec. 2006, para. 16. 27 AI Index: IOR 40/6040/2017