Nigeria’s’Chief of Staff and Second-in-Command, Lt. General Oladipo Diya and other military officers and civilians. This is alleged to be in contravention of his right to freedom of expression enshrined in Article 9 of the Charter. 68. The government argues that Malaolu was tried along with a number of people accused of involvement in an alleged plot to overthrow the late Gen. Sani Abacha. It contends that the trial was not an ostensible case of victimisation against Malaolu or his profession, but rather that one or two other journalists were also sentenced to imprisonment at the same trial. 69. Considering the facts at the disposal of the Commission and the response of the government, the Commission takes the view that it was only Mr Malaolu’s publication which led to his arrest, trial and conviction and therefore finds that in violation ofArticle 9 of the Charter as alleged. 70. The Complainant avers that while Mr Malaolu was in detention, he was subjected to such cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as having his legs and hands chained to the floor day and night. From the day he was arrested and detained, until the day he was sentenced by the tribunal, a total period of 147 days, he was not allowed to take his bath. He was given food twice a day, and while in detention, both in Lagos and Jos, before he faced the Special Investigation Panel that preceded the trial at the Special Military Tribunal, he was kept in solitary confinement in a cell meant for criminals. The complainant submits further that the treatment meted out to Mr Malaolu contravened Article 5 of the Charter. Article 5 provides: Every individual shall have the right to the respect of the dignity inherent in a human being and to the recognition of his legal status. All forms of exploitation and degradation of man particularly slavery, slave trade, torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment and treatment shall be prohibited. Principle 1 of the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment provides: All persons under any form of detention or imprisonment shall be treated in a humane manner and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person. Further, Principle 6 states: No person under any form of detention or imprisonment shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. No circumstance whatever may be invoked as a justification for torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. 71. It is worth noting that the term ‘cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment’ is to be interpreted so as to extend to the widest possible protection against abuses, whether physical or mental. 72. The government has not denied these allegations. Indeed, it has made it clear that it is not contesting the merits or demerits of the case. In the absence of any information to the contrary from the government, the Commission finds the various forms of treatments meted to Mr Malaolu while in detention, a violation of the right to respect and dignity and right to freedom from inhuman or degrading treatment guaranteed under Article 5 of the Charter and reinforced by the above Basic Principles. (See communications 64/92, 68/92 and 78/92 ( Krishna Achuthan on behalf of Aleke Banda, Amnesty International on behalf Orton and Vera Chirwa) / Malawi), communications 27/89, 46/91, 49/91 and 99/93 (Organisation mondiale contre la torture and AIJD, C.I.J and Union interafricaine des droits de l'Homme / Rwanda), respectively. 73. Although not an issue, the Commission notes that the alleged violations took place during a prolonged military rule and that such regimes, as rightly pointed out by the Government are abnormal th (see the Commission's Resolution on the Military, adopted at the 16 Ordinary Session in Banjul, The Gambia). The Commission sympathises with the Government of Nigeria over this awkward situation but however asserts that this does not in any way diminish its obligations under the Charter, nor the violations committed prior to its coming into office. 74. Finally, the Commission finds it necessary to clarify the position regarding the claim of the Government of Nigeria to the effect that the trial was conducted under a law validly enacted by the competent authority at the time. Also that the victim was charged, tried, convicted and sentenced in accordance with the provisions of such a law.