Claim of unlawful detention and torture inadmissible as not enough unsubstantiated

Facts

The author is a Russian national who claimed that the state party has violated his rights under articles 2(3)(b); 5(2); 7; 9; 14(3)(e) and (g) and (5); 17(1); and 23 of the Covenant. 

The author worked as a penitentiary officer in Russia. In August 2010 he was arrested by unknown persons while he was on duty, and driven towards his residence where his house was searched. The men threatened to drive him, as he was in uniform, to a temporary detention facility and lock him up with violent criminals. Such a search was conducted without any prosecutors oversight or warrant. Later that night, the author was forced to confess to selling drugs, and threatened that otherwise they would report that his father was involved in drug dealing.

The author alleges he was forced to confess under torture, and claims that he has been the victim of violations of articles 2(3)(b), 5(2), 7, 9, 14(3)(e), 3(g) and 5, 17(1), and 23 of the Covenant He also alleges a violation of the right to defend himself, without referring to any Covenant provision. 

Admissibility

The Committee further noted the author’s claims under article 2(3)(b) and 5(2) of the Covenant, however expressed that these articles cannot be invoked autonomously.

The Committee has also noted the author’s claims under articles 7, 9, 14(3)(g), 3(e) and (5), 17(1) and 23 of the Covenant, however found that in the absence of any further pertinent information on file, the Committee considered that the author has failed to sufficiently substantiate, for the purposes of admissibility, these allegations. Accordingly, the communication is inadmissible under article 2 of the Optional Protocol.

//