ICCPR Case Digest

CCPR/C/126/D/2697/2015

Communication

2697/2015

Submission: 2019.07.05

View Adopted: 2019.07.05

Ulan Nazaraliev v. Kyrgyzstan

Ill-treatment in detention in Kyrgyzstan, violation of article 7 as state party unable to offer explanation

Substantive Issues
  • Conditions of detention
  • Prompt and impartial investigation
  • Torture / ill-treatment
Relevant Articles
  • Article 10.1
  • Article 2.3 (a)
  • Article 7
Full Text

Facts

The author is a Kyrgyzstan national who claimed that the state party violated his rights under article 7, read alone and in conjunction with articles 2 (3) (a) and 10 (1) of the Covenant.

From July to November 2012, the author was kept in a temporary detention facility in Jalalabad on charges of hoolagism and robbery. He described the conditions of his detention as inhuman and degrading: detainees were kept in a basement area, comprising 10 cells with eight persons in each one, without ventilation or heating. As there were no sanitary facilities, during the day the author and his inmates were taken to the toilets in the yard without privacy. On 4 November the author informed authorities that he had a headache, to which they gave him a razor blade and informed him that he may cut himself.

In late November the author underwent a hungerstrike to protest his treatment in detention. Later in November, the author was hospitalised and diagnosed with a closed brain injury and high blood pressure, and further that he had sustained a concussion.

Complaint

The author claimed that the state party has violated his rights under article 7, read alone and in conjunction with articles 2 (3) (a) and 10 (1) of the Covenant.

Admissibility

The Committee found that the author had not demonstrated that he has exhausted the domestic remedies with regard to his claim that the conditions in which he was detained for four months were inhuman, in violation of article 10 (1) of the Covenant.

Merits

In light of the state party’s failure to explain how the author came to sustain his injury while in detention, the Committee found a violation of article 7 of the Covenant. Regarding the State party’s obligation to properly investigate the author’s claims of torture, the Committee noted that the State party limited itself to a preliminary examination, instead of launching a formal criminal investigation procedure. In such circumstances, the Committee concludes that the facts before it also disclose a violation of the author’s rights under article 7, read in conjunction with article 2 (3) (a) of the Covenant.

Recommendations

  • The State party is under an obligation to provide the author with an effective remedy. This requires it to make full reparation to individuals whose Covenant rights have been violated.
  • The Committee wishes to receive from the State party, within 180 days, information about the measures taken to give effect to the Committee’s Views.

Implementation

The Committee requested that the state party provide an update on measures taken to give effective to its views within 180 days, or before 5 January 2019. 

Rules of Procedure of the Human Rights Committee

Rules of Procedure of the Human Rights Committee CCPR/C/3/Rev.10

Arabic | Chinese | English | French | Russian | Spanish

CCPR NGO Participation

Documents adopted by the Human Rights Committee (March 2012)

English | French | Spanish | Russian | Handbook

CCPR NHRI Participation

Documents adopted by the Human Rights Committee (November 2012)

English | French | Spanish | Russian | Arabic | Chinese