Police torture and a coerced confession in a rape case, overlooked medical evidence and inadequate State investigation

Facts

The author was detained by Kyrgyz police under the pretext of bringing him to the police station, later arrested for public intoxication, and then coerced into confessing to rape through torture. Despite physical evidence of abuse and a coerced confession, courts upheld his 20-year rape conviction. Efforts to initiate an investigation against the police for torture were consistently dismissed by prosecutorial authorities and courts, even in the face of medical evidence of his injuries. Notably, the medical evidence suggests that he suffered significant injuries while in detention, which were not initially reported by the doctor who examined him shortly after the alleged torture. All domestic remedies were exhausted as the author’s appeals were denied, leaving the allegations of torture and coerced confession unaddressed. The author alleges violation of articles 7 and 2 (3) of the Covenant.

Furthermore, the author claims his rights under article 14 (3) (g) were violated as he was forced to confess under torture, and this confession was used to convict him. His complaints were consistently ignored by the trial court and during appeals.

Admissibility

Noting the author’s assertion of exhausting all domestic remedies, which the State did not dispute, the Committee found no obstacles to examining the case under article 5 (2) (b) of the Optional Protocol. The claims under articles 7 (regarding torture and ill-treatment), in conjunction with article 2 (3) (on the duty to investigate), and article 14 (3) (g) (concerning forced confessions), were deemed sufficiently substantiated for admissibility.

Merits

The Committee considered the author’s claims of torture by police in 2009 and the subsequent forced confession used in his rape conviction. The Committee stressed the need for prompt and impartial investigations into human rights violations, specifically referencing the necessity for criminal investigation and prosecution under article 7 of the Covenant, which concerns freedom from torture. In the author’s case, they found significant procedural flaws in how the author’s torture allegations were handled by the Sokuluk District Prosecutor’s Office. The investigations were deemed inadequate, lacking thorough interviews and explanations regarding the discrepancies in detention timelines and injury reports. Furthermore, the Committee identified a breach of article 14 (3) (g) of the Covenant, related to the right against forced confessions. The author’s claim of a coerced confession was overlooked, and the confession was inappropriately used to convict him.

Recommendations

The State party is obligated, inter alia, to:

a) Conduct, if necessary, a new trial, in accordance with the principles of fair hearings and other procedural safeguards provided by the Covenant;

b) Conduct a prompt and impartial investigation into the author’s allegations of torture and, if the allegations are confirmed, to have the persons responsible prosecuted;

c) Provide the author with adequate compensation;

d) Take all steps necessary to prevent similar violations from occurring in the future.

Implementation

Deadline for implementation: 9 January 2024