A/HRC/10/83 Page 11 to liberalize the work of mass media, and whether it is prepared to draw a clear distinction between the legitimate fight against terrorism and strict respect for freedom of religion. 51. While making reference to a number of steps taken to address concerns about the human rights situation, including the abolition of the death-penalty and the introduction of habeas corpus, Ireland asked if statistics were available on the use of habeas corpus and if the number of persons in prisons have fallen since its introduction. Noting a number of reports after his visit to the country in late 2002 by the Special Rapporteur on torture, Ireland asked changes to be made to improve the situation. Ireland recommended that Uzbekistan adopt a zero-tolerance approach to the continuing problem of torture, and to the practice of impunity, as recommended by CAT and the Special Rapporteur. 52. Ireland recommended that Uzbekistan urgently facilitate the request by the Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders to make a country visit, and implement the recommendations made by the Committee against Torture on human rights defenders. Ireland asked about steps taken to make it easier for NGOs and the media to operate without interference. Ireland asked if the new opposition parties will be allowed to register and operate freely and the progress being made in implementing OSCE/ODIHR recommendations made after the last election. Ireland recommended that Uzbekistan lift all restrictions on the activities of civil society and comply with the request by the Human Rights Committee to bring its law, regulations and practice governing the registration of political parties into line with the ICCPR. 53. The head of delegation Dr. Akmal Saidov stated that the delegation would seek to answer thoroughly to questions raised. 54. With regards to torture and habeas corpus, the delegation (Deputy General Prosecutor) noted that thorough work on these issues has enabled Uzbekistan to almost fully implement recommendations of United Nations bodies. It referred to a statement of the President who acknowledged the existence of intimidations by law enforcement officials but made clear that the use of force in police investigations and arrests cannot be allowed. It emphasised efforts of law enforcement bodies in monitoring investigations, arrests and custody in conformity with international standards. It also stated that pamphlets have been distributed among the population indicating citizen’s rights with regards to detention. 55. It stated that access to a lawyer is available for all detainees and that a 24 hours lawyer’s service exists. 56. As to the prohibition of torture, the delegation stated that the principle of inadmissibility of evidence obtained under torture is enshrined in national legislation and complaints about torture could be a basis to reverse criminal sentences. An independent body to consider torture complaints has been established. Further measures are envisaged to ensure that evidence in trials on alleged cases of torture is objective. It stated that from 2004 to 2008 20 criminal cases have been brought to court to prosecute 38 law-enforcement officials accused of torture, which were convicted in accordance with article 235 of the Criminal Code. It also noted that in 2009 discussions with United Nations experts will take place on the question whether the definition of torture in national legislation needs to be amended. Furthermore it underlined that a national action plan has been elaborated to implement recent recommendations of CAT. Additionally, it referred to activities of monitoring of law enforcement bodies by NGOs and its impact on preventing human rights violations.