A/HRC/37/50/Add.2 87. Furthermore, pursuant to the Decree Law No: 685, the Inquiry Commission on the State of Emergency Measures (“the Commission”) was established in order to carry out an assessment of, and render a decision on, applications related to certain measures directly conducted by virtue of the Decree Laws on account of having membership, affiliation or connection with terrorist organizations. The Commission has the authority to conduct an examination as to the measures concerning the dismissal or discharge from public service, profession or organization in which the persons held office, the dismissal from studentship, the closure of institutions and organizations and the revocation of the ranks of retired personnel. The Commission received applications from 17 th July through 14th September 2017. In the event that a new Decree is issued, it will continue to receive applications in connection with that Decree. Moreover, parties having legal interest are entitled to file actions against the decisions of the Commission with the Ankara administrative courts which will be determined by the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors. 88. The fact that a judicial remedy has been introduced against the decisions of the Commission is to provide the persons dismissed or discharged from public service, profession or organization in which they held office or closed institutions and organizations with the opportunity to bring their cases before the independent judiciary. The Commission decisions can be appealed. Besides, individual application to the Constitutional Court is applicable. 89. On 12 June 2017, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the Inquiry Commission has to be resorted to in order to exhaust domestic remedies. This clearly recognizes the Inquiry Commission as a legal remedy for the measures taken directly as a part of the legislative decrees. 90. Furthermore, through the Review Boards established within public institutions and the Prime Ministry, around 35 thousand public employees have been reinstated to date. Around 350 private entities have also been reopened. 91. As to Paragraph 85, in connection with a decision on “no grounds to investigate and prosecute a torture complaint in Trabzon”, the Government would like to inform that the said decision was not taken to due to the so-called “immunity given to State officials under the State of Emergency decrees”, but due to insufficient evidence proving the claims of ill treatment. Furthermore, decision of “no grounds to investigate and prosecute” was later repealed and judicial proceedings are currently underway regarding claims. 92. In connection with Paragraph 88, the Government wishes to advise that the civil inspectors who can inspect holding cells are from the Ministry of Interior and in addition to governors, mayors and Human Rights Inquiry Commission of the Parliament, the members of the Parliament can also monitor these places. 93. With respect to the statement in Paragraph 88, the Government wishes to inform that, relevant Ombudsman and experts of Ombudsman Institution pay visits to prisons and removal centers. Ombudsman Institution issued a Recommendation, dated 02.12.2016 and numbered 2015/6136, as a result of investigations and on site visit to Aşkale Removal Centre on 20-21 January 2016. Lack of monitoring of detention locations 94. Regarding the Turkish National Human Rights and Equality Institution, the Government is of the opinion that Paragraph 90 should be amended as “…..However, at the time of the visit, due to the delays caused by attempted coup on 15 July 2016, no commissioners for the board had been appointed to the Institution. 95. As far as “the dismantling of the Prison Monitoring Boards” are concerned (Paragraph 91), the Government would like to inform that with the Decree Law No: 673, 12