CPT _2010_ 82 - EN - Report Armenia 2010 _2_ - The Government ...

- 72 -Procedural safeguards against police ill-treatmentrecommendations- all detained persons to effectively benefit from the right of notification of custody as fromthe very outset of de facto deprivation of liberty. Further, any possibility to delay theexercise of the right of notification of custody should be clearly circumscribed in law andmade subject to appropriate safeguards (e.g. any delay to be recorded in writing with thereasons therefor, and to require the approval of a senior police officer unconnected with thecase at hand or a prosecutor) and strictly limited in time (paragraph 29);- the Armenian authorities to ensure that the right of access to a lawyer for persons deprivedof their liberty applies effectively as from the very outset of their de facto deprivation ofliberty by the police. If necessary, the relevant legal provisions should be amended(paragraph 30);- witnesses summoned to a police establishment to be systematically made aware of thepossibility to be assisted by a lawyer of their choice during any police interviews(paragraph 32);- the Armenian authorities to take measures, including of a legislative nature, to make it clearthat:• the right of access to a doctor applies as from the moment of de facto deprivation ofliberty;• medical examinations of detained persons should be conducted out of the hearing and –unless the doctor concerned expressly requests otherwise in a given case – out of thesight of police officers;• the results of every examination, as well as any relevant statements by the detainedperson and the doctor's conclusions, should be formally recorded by the doctor and madeavailable to the detainee and, upon request, his or her lawyer;• whenever injuries are recorded by a doctor which are consistent with possible illtreatment,the record should be systematically brought to the attention of the relevantprosecutor (paragraph 34);- whenever a detained person presents injuries and makes allegations of ill-treatment, he orshe should be promptly seen by an independent doctor with recognised forensic training,who should draw conclusions as to the degree of consistency between the allegations madeand the objective medical findings. The detained person should be entitled to such anexamination without prior authorisation from an investigator, prosecutor or judge(paragraph 34);- measures to be taken to ensure that the confidentiality of medical documentation is strictlyobserved. Naturally, health-care staff examining persons detained by the police may informpolice officers on a need-to-know basis about the state of health of a detained person,including medication being taken and particular health risks (paragraph 34);