CCPR/C/116/D/2231/2012 on the grounds of his ethnic origin and to punish him for reporting police abuse, amounts to torture in violation of article 7 of the Covenant. The torture was exacerbated by the conditions in which the author was detained and the failure to provide him with medical treatment, in further violation of article 7. 3.2 The State party’s failure to take measures to protect the author from torture and its failure to conduct an impartial, effective and thorough investigation into the repeated torture of the author and to provide access to effective remedies, including compensation and rehabilitation, amount to a violation of article 7, read separately and in conjunction with article 2 (3) of the Covenant. 3.3 The author’s detention was not in accordance with domestic law, had no legitimate purpose, and was motivated by his role as a human rights defender and by his ethnicity. It was therefore unlawful and arbitrary, in violation of article 9 and prohibited under articles 2 and 26 of the Covenant. 3.4 The conditions in which the author was detained, in particular at the Bazar-Korgon police station, were inhuman, in violation of article 10 of the Covenant. 3.5 Furthermore, the author was denied adequate time and facilities to prepare for his defence, in particular the possibility of communicating with his counsel, and public officials violated the presumption of innocence by openly calling him guilty. The lack of independence and impartiality in the author’s trial and subsequent appeal process and the atmosphere of intimidation both at trial and on appeal violated his right to a fair hearing. He was unable to effectively call or cross-examine witnesses and was not present at the first potentially meaningful review of his conviction by the Supreme Court, all in violation of article 14 of the Covenant. 3.6 Finally, the author considers that the authorities detained and tortured him and denied him a fair trial in large part because of his work as a human rights defender in Kyrgyzstan, in violation of articles 9 and 19 of the Covenant. State party’s observations on admissibility and the merits 4.1 In a note verbale dated 28 June 2013, the State party submits that on the basis of the complaint submitted to the Committee, it had created a special investigative group consisting of five prosecutors, which was tasked with investigating the author’s claims. 4.2 The State party explains that on 12 June 2010, at around 4 p.m., a large group of ethnic Uzbeks gathered at the border between Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan. The akim (mayor) of the Bazar-Korgon district arrived, tried to calm the situation and asked the people to return to their homes. Several people, including the author, urged the group to take the akim hostage and cross into Uzbekistan. Later that day, the same people hurled insults at ethnic Kyrgyz people and called for active disobedience and armed resistance. 4.3 On 13 June 2010, a group of 400-500 persons of Uzbek ethnicity blocked the Bishkek-Osh highway. The group was armed with guns, knives, metal rods and wooden sticks. A group of police officers from the Bazar-Korgon police district was sent to talk to the crowd. The officers were not armed, having left their pistols at the police station. 4.4 The author and others incited the angry mob to attack the police officers. As a result, 13 police officers2 were injured and one officer, M. Suleimanov, was killed and his body burned. On the basis of these facts, the prosecutor of the Bazar-Korgon district initiated a criminal investigation. As several witnesses named the author as a perpetrator of the crime, 2 The State party provides the names of all the injured police officers. 5