imprisonment and five years’ administrative supervision; this verdict was upheld on appeal on 31 May 1996. 2.22The complainant says that he requested the judge at the court of first instance in Tunis to protect him from the torture to which he was subjected daily in prison, and also informed him that he had been on hunger strike for a week. According to the complainant, the police then escorted him from the courtroom in the presence of the judge, who did not react. 2.23While held in Tunis central prison from 13 April 1995 to 31 August 1996, the complainant was subjected to torture which, on this occasion, comprised the practice of “falka”, in which the torturers tie the victim’s legs to a bar and raise his feet in the air so that they can whip the soles of his feet. The complainant explains that the deputy director of the prison personally participated in these torture sessions, tying him, for example, to the door of his cell before hitting him on the head with a truncheon until he passed out. At the end of August and beginning of September 1995, the complainant was placed in solitary confinement and deprived of washing facilities. He then went on a hunger strike, demanding medical attention and an end to the discriminatory treatment against him. 2.24After being transferred to Grombalia prison, the complainant continued his hunger strike from 28 November to 13 December 1997 and, once again, was beaten on the orders of the director. 2.25The complainant states that, during his years of detention, he was only ever able to have one meeting with his lawyers, and that was in the presence of a prison officer. 2.26After his release on 12 April 1998, the complainant was subjected to harassment, in the form of summonses for questioning, interrogation and daily supervision, until he fled the country for Switzerland on 22 June 1998, where he was granted refugee status in December 1998. 2.27The complainant states that, since he fled the country, members of his family have been subjected to interrogation and other forms of humiliation, including a refusal to issue a passport to his mother. 2.28The complainant provides a list of people who carried out acts of torture against him, namely, Ezzeddine Jnaieh, Director of State Security in 1991; Mohamed Ennaceur, Director of General Intelligence in 1995; Moncef Ben Gbila, senior officer in the State Security Service in 1987; Mojahid Farhi, lieutenant colonel; Belhassen Kilani, full lieutenant; Salim Boughnia, full lieutenant; Faouzi El Attrouss, major; Hédi Ezzitouni, full lieutenant; Abderrahman Guesmi, Interior Ministry official; Faycal Redissi, Interior Ministry official; Tahar Dlaiguia, Bouchoucha detention centre official; Mohamed Ben Amor, State Security; Hassen Khemiri, warrant officer; Mohamed Kassem, deputy director of Messadine prison in 1997; Habib Haoula, prison wing supervisor at Messadine prison; and Mohamed Zrelli, prison wing supervisor at Grombalia prison. The complainant adds that the then Minister for Internal Affairs, Abdallah Kallel, should be held responsible for the treatment to which he was subjected since, at a press conference held on 22 May 1991, the minister named him as the person responsible for a campaign of terror. 2.29The complainant describes the after-effects of his torture and the conditions in which he was held, which include hearing problems (he submits a certificate from a Swiss ear, nose and throat specialist), rheumatism, skin disorders, an ulcer and mental problems. 2.30As to whether all domestic remedies have been exhausted, the complainant argues that, although such remedies are provided in Tunisian law, they are unavailable in practice because of the bias of judges and the impunity granted to those responsible for violations. He adds that the regulations governing the activities of bodies which play a role in upholding human rights, such as the Higher Committee for Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the Constitutional Council, prevent them from supporting complaints of torture. To back up his argument, he cites the reports of such non governmental organizations as Amnesty International. Substance of the complaint 3.1The complainant maintains that the Tunisian Government has breached the following articles of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment: Article 1. The practices described above, such as “falka”, the “roast chicken” position, “balanco”, the “chair”, etc., to which the complainant was subjected, constitute acts of torture. Article 2, paragraph 1. It is alleged that the State party not only failed to take effective measures to prevent torture, but even mobilized its administrative machinery and, in particular, its police force as an instrument of torture against the complainant. Article 4. It is alleged that the State party has not ensured that all the acts of torture to which the complainant has been subjected are offences under its criminal law. Article 5. It is alleged that the State party has instituted no legal proceedings against those responsible for torturing the complainant. Article 11. It is alleged that the authorities have not used their supervisory powers to prevent torture; instead, specific instructions have been given that torture is to be applied. Article 12. It is alleged that the State party has not carried out an investigation of the acts of torture committed against the complainant. Article 13. It is alleged that the State party has not effectively upheld the complainant’s right to lodge a complaint with the competent authorities. Article 14. It is alleged that the State party has ignored the complainant’s right to make a complaint and has thereby deprived him of his right to redress and rehabilitation.