3.2 According to the police report/ eight persons were involved in the hold-up of the two banks, escaping in a pick-up truck, of -which the author -was said to be the driver. A police car which followed them was able to arrest three of them after a shoot-out. The remaining five were apprehended later. The report does not specify when or where Mr. Teran Jijon was apprehended. 3.3 The State party denies that Mr. Teran Jijon was at any time subjected to ill-treatment in detention. It further contends that the judicial proceedings against the author were at all times conducted in conformity with the procedures established under Ecuadorian law, 3.4 With respect to the second indictment against Mr. Teran Jijon, the State party explains that it was not based on the charge of bank robbery, but rather on the charge of illegal possession of firearms. Issues and proceedings before the Committee 4.1 During its thirty-ninth session, the Committee considered the admissibility of the communication and noted that the State party, while addressing issues of merit, had not shown whether any investigation with regard to the allegations of torture had taken place or was in progress, nor contended that effective domestic remedies remained open to the author. In the circumstances, the Committee concluded that the requirements of article 5, paragraph 2 (b), of the Optional Protocol had been met. 4.2 The Committee further noted that the facts as submitted appeared to raise issues under provisions of the Covenant which had not specifically been invoked by the authors. It reiterated that whereas authors must invoke the substantive rights contained in the Covenant, they are not required, for purposes of the Optional Protocol, necessarily to do so by reference to specific articles of the Covenant. So as to assist the State party in preparing its submission under article 4, paragraph 2, of the Optional Protocol, the Committee suggested that the State party should address the allegations (a) under article 10 of the Covenant, that Juan Teran Jijon was subjected to ill-treatment during detention, (b) under article 14, paragraph 3 (b), that he was denied access to a lawyer after his arrest, (c) under article 14, paragraph 3 (g), that he was forced to sign bianco confessions, and (d) that his indictment in January 1987 corresponded to the same offence for which he had already been tried and convicted, which appeared to raise issues under article 14, paragraph 7. 4*3 On 4 July 199Q, therefore, the Committee declared the communication admissible in so far as it appeared to raise issues under articles 7, 9, 10 and 14 of the Covenant. 4.4 The State party did not reply to the Committee's request for information and observations, in spite of a reminder addressed to it on 29 July 1991. 5.1 The Committee has considered the communication in the light of all the information made available by the parties, as required under article 5/ paragraph 1, of the Optional Protocol. Concerning the substance of the authors' allegations, the Committee notes with concern that the State party has confined itself to statements of a general nature, by categorically denying that the author was at any time subjected to ill-treatment, and by -263-