safeguard, all of which shall apply from the moment when they are first deprived of their liberty. These include: a) The right that a relative or relative or other appropriate third person is notified of the detention; b) The right to an independent medical examination; c) The right of access to a lawyer; and d) Notification of the above rights in a language which the person deprived of their liberty understand. 175. In the present case, the victims were not examined by doctors at any point during their pre-trial detention. Even when they reported their torture and ill-treatment, they were still denied access to medical personnel by the authorities. 176. Only when the allegations of torture were made for the second time during the trial itself did the Judge order the examination of the Victims by the FMA. The forensic examination conducted by the authorities plainly did not satisfy the obligations set out above, as it was carried out more than 6 months after the Victims complained that they were subjected to torture and ill-treatment and was, therefore, ineffectual as a method of prevention or investigation. 177. The African Commission therefore holds that the failure by the Respondent State to provide prompt medical services to the victims whiles they were under detention violates the victims‟ rights to prompt medical services whiles under custody. 178. The African Commission also notes that the victims were denied counsel during their detention, including the critical interrogation sessions. In the Jamaican Case of Osbourne Wright and Eric Harvey v. Jamaica, adopted on 27 October 1995, the United Nations Human Rights Committee has held that 52