Warrantless arrest and excessively long detention in Chad

Facts

The authors of the communication are three nationals of Chad and one national of Cameroon, all of whom allege a violation of their rights under article  9 of the Covenant. The authors were arrested without a warrant and without being informed of the charges against them, in connection with a case involving the international trafficking of aircraft and military weapons. One author was interviewed without the assistance of a lawyer, and the remaining authors were interviewed without being informed of the charges against them and without having access to a lawyer. Following 67 days in detention, the authors were transferred to a remand prison, were informed of the charges brought against them, and were placed under a detention order. The authors’ lawyers made requests to the State party’s authorities for access to their case files, which went unanswered. While in detention, the authors’ health and finances deteriorated, and they were subjected to intimidation by prison officers. The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention issued an opinion finding in favour of the authors, and considered that the authors’ arrest and detention were arbitrary. The authors claim a violation of article 9 of the Covenant on account of their arbitrary and unlawful detention.

Admissibility

The Committee considers that the communication is admissible under the Optional Protocol. The fact that the authors’ case was examined by an international investigation or settlement body—here, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention—does not preclude the Committee from considering the communication, unless the State party has made a reservation explicitly prohibiting successive appeals. The State party had not entered such a reservation. In the absence of objections by the State party regarding the exhaustion of domestic remedies, there is no obstacle to the admissibility of the authors’ communication.

Merits

The Committee considers that the facts disclose a violation of article 9 of the Covenant. The Committee observes that the authors were arrested without a warrant and were only informed of the charges against them only more than two months after their arrest, when the authors were brought before a Supreme Court judge. The State party failed to demonstrate that the arrests were reasonable and necessary, or that the authorities had decided without delay on the lawfulness of the detention. The Committee further observes that the authors’ lawyers were unable to gain access to the authors’ files in order to challenge the grounds and charges on which they were arrested, and the investigating judge likewise had not received any files concerning the authors. Finally, the Committee observes that, although the authors are no longer in detention, no domestic court has ruled on their detention in the five years that passed since their pretrial detention and subsequent release. In light of these considerations, and taking note of the opinion of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Committee concludes that there has been a violation of article 9 of the Covenant.

Recommendations

The State party should, inter alia:

• (a) provide authors with an effective remedy by making full reparation to individuals whose Covenant rights have been violated;
• (b) take appropriate steps to provide the authors with adequate compensation and appropriate measures of satisfaction; and
• (c) take all steps necessary to prevent similar violations from occurring in the future.

Implementation

Deadline for implementation: 15 September 2024