the country's African Charter-compliant Criminal Procedure is applicable or to amend Article 19(1) so that it is compliant with standards to be set by the Commission. 169. Under the second head according to the Complainants, none of them were told the reason they were arrested at the time of their arrest. Neither were they informed of the reasons of their arrest after they were taken to their respective cells. The first time they heard anything that resembled an explanation of why they were arrested was when they were taken to court for a remand hearing. Even then they were not informed of their right to remain silent or to have an attorney. They simply overheard the police officers explaining the case to the judge. They were not informed about their right to legal representation or medical care at any time in the process of arrest, interrogation or trial. They were prevented from seeking legal help and medical care despite the fact that they sought such services. They were also not informed of their right to remain silent and that any statement they make may be used against them in court of law in accordance with the· Constitution. And that they were actively prevented from exercising these rights and were forced to make statements against themselves. 170. Under the third head according to the Complainants although the Court ordered the investigating police officers and departments to bring them to court on the 24th October 2012 and either charge or release them, the police failed to do so and they also failed to appear in court on that date. The Court instead of ordering the release of the Complainants, issuing a habeas corpus order, or issuing a bench warrant for the delinquent officers, simply verbally declared that the case was closed. The Complainants were subsequently brought to the Court on the 29th October 2012 and charged with terrorism offences. 171. With the foregoing matters in mind, the Complainants submitted that their detention from 24th October 2012 to 29th October 2012, a period of 5 days, was clear violation of their right under Article 6 of the African Charter. Additionally, the fact that there was no investigation as to who was responsible for this violation and that were not compensated for this violation are also violations of Article 6 of the African Charter. Alleged violation of the prohibition against Torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 5 of the African Charter) 172. According to the Complainants they were subjected to acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment and treatment within the meaning of Article 5 of the African Charter and Article 1 of the UN Convention against Torture (CAT). The severe acts of pain and suffering inflicted on them, the Complainants submitted, constitute a violation of several provisions of the Robben Island Guidelines and the CAT. 173. According to the Complainants, they were subjected to severe physical and psychological pain during their pre-trial detention at the Federal Police Crime Investigation and Forensic Sector commonly known as Maikelawi "where prisoners of conscience and others subject to politically-motivated detention as often detained when first The acts of tor~re and ilI-treatm.ent inflic~ed on Compla~na~ts i contmuous and strenuous mvoluntary physical exercise, sleep depnvatIon, sohtafYI .0;' , . confinement (sometimes in underground locations, dark rooms, freezi ,~@ntainers), o~~l\, l~ =r": 37 Complainants Submissions on the Merits, page 59. l! ~ ~ .... '1 >"":6 1t ' II~Z ~~ "Sf, T .r~ J ,-. ?-. [ '4:1' ~""':- (.)y 'V ~~-R!CP.\'t'i ~-\:Jq ,~. ~,/ fi-{:j '"