A/HRC/25/64 laws remain on the books and new prosecutions are taking place under them, and urges the Government to expedite their abolition/amendment. 6. The Special Rapporteur commends the work of the prisoner review committee set up in February 2013 to identify remaining prisoners of conscience. He recommends that the Government continue to convene meetings of that committee and, furthermore, upgrade the status of the committee to enable it to investigate suspected cases of prisoners of conscience, including in Rakhine State, which entails access to prisons and the authority to question relevant state officials. 7. Referring to the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law, the Special Rapporteur highlights the obligations of the State to former prisoners of conscience, which include equal and effective access to justice; adequate, effective and prompt reparation for harm suffered; and access to relevant information concerning violations and reparation mechanisms. Reparations involve restitution, including restoration of the enjoyment of human rights and of employment; compensation, including for economically assessable damage; rehabilitation, including medical and psychological care as well as legal and social services; satisfaction, including public disclosure of the truth, the restoration of the dignity, reputation and rights of the victim and a public apology; and guarantees of non-repetition, including ensuring effective civilian control of military and security forces and strengthening the independence of the judiciary. The Special Rapporteur is concerned that former prisoners of conscience are required to declare criminal records when applying for jobs, education or vocational training. This has a detrimental effect on their right to work and their access to education. Other difficulties faced on release included access to passports. B. Conditions of detention and treatment of prisoners 8. The Special Rapporteur remains concerned about the ongoing practice of torture in places of detention in Myanmar and the absence of accountability. He recently wrote to the Government regarding the emblematic cases of Myo Myint Swe and Than Htun; the Government has provided formal replies.3 During his latest visit, the Special Rapporteur met with the family of Than Htun. Despite the extensive evidence to support the allegation that the police tortured Than Htun to death while he was in police custody, township and district level courts have refused to let the family file a criminal case against the police. The Special Rapporteur has also continued to receive allegations from Kachin State and northern Shan State that the military are arbitrarily detaining and torturing, during interrogation, young men suspected of belonging to ethnic armed groups. 9. Currently, prompt, effective and impartial investigations into allegations of torture against police and military personnel do not take place in Myanmar. For instance, no action has been taken on the Special Rapporteur’s previous recommendation (A/68/397, para. 91 (i)) for an investigation into allegations of torture in Buthidaung prison. Furthermore, military and police personnel who are found to be responsible for committing acts of torture are not being transparently held to account through the criminal justice system and punished in a manner commensurate with the gravity of the offence. In the case of Myo Myint Swe, the responsible police personnel were subjected only to internal disciplinary measures, involving transfers, dismissals and reduction of police service. 3 4 See A/HRC/23/51, p. 10, and A/HRC/25/74, p. 46.