226. The Respondent State on the other hand submits that it was absolutely impossible for the competent authorities to verify the authenticity of the Victim’s allegations that he submitted complaints, and that it was therefore unable to provide the Commission with information on the matter. The Respondent State further submits that information was lost following the revolution of January 2011 which led to the storming of prisons, and the destruction of the Public Prosecution headquarters and police stations. 227. The Respondent State argues that the Victim did not renew his application by forwarding his complaints when he learned that his previous complaints had gone missing, in accordance with the requirement under the Criminal Procedures Code. The Respondent State contends that as a result, investigations into the allegations of torture had not been carried out by competent authorities. The Respondent State adds that the Victim still has the right to renew his claims by forwarding all available evidence and arguments, and taking legal action under Egypt’s legislative and legal regime, so that an investigation can take place. 228. The UNCAT, which the Respondent State is party to, provides that a State Party should ensure that any individual who alleges he has been subjected to torture in its territory has the right to complain to and to have his case promptly and impartially examined by, its competent authorities.49 Further, the Robben Island Guidelines, state that investigations into all allegations of torture or illtreatment shall be conducted promptly, impartially and effectively, guided by the Istanbul Protocol.50 229. According to the Istanbul Protocol, the broad purpose of investigation is to establish the facts relating to alleged incidents of torture in order to identify perpetrators and facilitate their prosecution, and to obtain redress for victims.51 The Protocol adds that those carrying out investigations must at a minimum, seek to: obtain statements from victims of alleged torture; recover and preserve evidence related to the alleged torture; identify possible witnesses and obtain statements from them concerning the alleged torture; and determine how, when and where the alleged incidents of torture occurred and any pattern or practice that may have brought about the torture.52 230. Furthermore, the Principles on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (the Principles on Effective Investigation and Documentation), which form an integral component of the Istanbul Protocol, provide that States shall ensure that “[e]ven in the absence of an express complaint, an investigation shall be undertaken if there are other indications that torture or ill-treatment might have 49 UNCAT, Article 13. Robben Island Guidelines, Guideline 19. 51 Istanbul Protocol, para 77. The Commission in its jurisprudence has also held that where there are allegations of torture, the State is under the obligation to initiate a prompt, impartial and effective investigation in order to determine the veracity of the allegations and to bring the perpetrators to justice if the allegations are founded, as well as to afford redress to the victims (Monim Elgak and others v. Sudan (n 45 above), para 100). 52 Istanbul Protocol, para 77. 50 35