89. The Complainants allege that the failure to investigate the torture of the Victim is part of a pattern of impunity for perpetrators of torture in Egypt. The Complainants allege that systemic impunity, is in substantial part, the product of deficiencies in Egypt’s legal structure that regulates the accountability of officials in cases of torture, in particular, the narrow definition of torture and restrictions on the rights of victims when the alleged perpetrator is a public official. The Complainants allege that these deficiencies continue to exist. Narrow definition of torture 90. The Complainants aver that the narrow definition of torture under Article 126 of the Penal Code of Egypt (the Penal Code) does not conform to the definition of torture under the UNCAT, which Egypt has ratified. 91. The Complainants aver that this definition of torture fails as it requires the tortured person to be an accused. The Complainants submit that in cases similar to that of the Victim’s, where the person is not officially charged with a crime but rather held in administrative detention, abuses committed do not qualify as torture under the Penal Code. The Complainants submit that the definition only criminalises the act of torture if it was inflicted with the intention of forcing a suspect to confess. The Complainants submit that torture may also be inflicted as a form of punishment and intimidation. 92. The Complainants further submit that Article 126 of the Penal Code does not extend criminal responsibility to all persons who are involved in torture, such as officials or any other person acting in an official capacity when they consent or acquiesce to torture or other ill-treatment, or persons who are complicit or participate in torture. 93. The Complainants submit that other articles in the Penal Code which may be used to complain against acts of torture or ill-treatment exhibit structural flaws that deprive the Victim of appropriate redress. The Complainants submit that Article 129 classifies cruelty by a public official or any person charged with performing a public service as a low level offence, carrying a possible sentence not exceeding one year or a fine not exceeding 200 Egyptian pounds (less than 30 USD). The Complainants aver that such punishment falls short of the necessary measures the State is obliged to take under the Charter. Restriction on the rights of victims 94. The Complainants submit that Articles 63 and 232 (2) of Egypt’s Criminal Procedure Code (the Criminal Procedure Code) give the Office of the Public Prosecutor exclusive authority to investigate allegations of torture and illtreatment; to bring charges against public officials; and to appeal court verdicts. Where the prosecution decides there are no grounds for a case it issues a “no grounds order”, which could be appealed to a judicial organ if the alleged perpetrator is a civilian, but cannot be appealed if the alleged perpetrator is a 14