83. The Complainants further allege that the Victim’s conditions of detention violated his right to dignity under Article 5, and amounted to ill-treatment. The Complainants submit that the cells where the Victim was detained were small (150cm x 75cm at Abu Za’bal) and frequently overcrowded (30 prisoners in cells so small, they had to take shifts sleeping at Damanhour). The Complainants submit that many of the cells had no access to sanitary facilities, lacked proper ventilation and were at times filled with sewage water. The Complainants add that the Victim had at times no access to fresh water, and that for a significant portion of his detention, the Victim was blindfolded and handcuffed. Alleged violation of Articles 5 and 1 Failure to provide safeguards against torture 84. The Complainants submit that the Respondent State failed to provide adequate safeguards against torture, including by denying the Victim access to medical assistance and a lawyer; preventing his family from knowing where he was or from visiting him; failing to properly register his detention and failing to bring him promptly before an effective judicial authority. 85. The Complainants submit that the obligation to provide effective safeguards against torture is contained in Article 1 of the Charter. The Complainants allege that the above-stated failures and denials by the Government left the Victim exceptionally vulnerable to the torture and constitute a violation of the State’s positive obligations under Articles 1 and 5 of the Charter. Failure to conduct prompt, impartial and effective investigation of torture 86. The Complainants allege that no prompt, impartial and effective investigation has been undertaken into the torture of the Victim as required by Articles 1 and 5 of the Charter. The Complainants allege that this failure occurred despite the Egyptian authorities being on ample notice of the allegations of torture, following numerous complaints by the Victim and his sister to the Public Prosecutor. The Complainants submit that those complaints related to the Victim’s torture in detention and the lack of access to medical treatment for injuries he suffered as a result of the torture and other conditions of detention. The Complainants submit that none of the complaints were effective in obtaining redress, as they were simply ignored and no investigation was undertaken. 87. The Complainants allege that not only did the authorities fail to take basic investigative steps, the reaction of the authorities was to retaliate by beating the Victim and sending him to an isolated jail where he was tortured on arrival. 88. The Complainants aver that following the release of the Victim in March 2011, the Victim asked the public prosecutor about the complaints that had previously been filed, only to be told that the files no longer existed. Systematic deficiencies in domestic law and accountability structure 13