E/CN.4/2003/24 page 38 60. A criminal case file was opened against him for resisting, insulting and threatening police officers and he was brought before the competent public prosecutor, who instituted criminal proceedings against him and committed him to trial. 61. The administrative inquiry revealed that the two police officers who had participated in the arrest, detention and committal of Mr. Kalamiotis had acted legally, as Mr. Kalamiotis had used violence against them and refused to comply with their orders and follow them to the police station, unlike his friends, who followed the policemen and no violence was used against them. According to the inquiry, the scratches he suffered had been caused by the resistance he offered to avoid being handcuffed by the policemen and his fight with them. They were minor scratches and grazes, absolutely compatible with the degree of violence used against him. The allegation that his wife was not allowed to give him shoes proved false, as a police officer gave him his shoes at the police station, but he threw them away. His allegation that 20 patrol cars of the Hellenic Police had gone to his house was also false. 62. According to the data kept in our Service and on the basis of the information mentioned above, Mr. Kalamiotis did not file a complaint against police officers, while it is not clear whether or not he requested to be examined by a coroner. It should be noted that during his detention and when he was brought before the public prosecutor he did not ask to file a complaint against the police officers or to be examined by a doctor. 63. The sworn administrative inquiry that was conducted to investigate allegations made revealed that they were groundless, as the persons who were allegedly abused testified under oath that no one had mistreated them, except for minor Theodoros Stefanou, who claimed that a policeman had used violence against him, in the presence of the Commander, an allegation that was not corroborated by any of the statements by other witnesses, although at least five other Romanies were present in the Department during his stay there. 64. The claim that Romani Nikos Theodoropoulos was tortured and forced to sign a statement confessing a robbery he had not committed is not true, because the criminal case file that was opened against him and three other Romanies for the said robbery does not contain any such confession. 65. According to a certificate issued by the Argostoli Hospital, where Stefanos Theodorou went on 5 August 2001 at 7.30 a.m. after leaving the Security Department of Argostoli, his examination showed that he was suffering from “a reported head injury, caused by beating 12 hours before. He complains about dizziness and bad headache”. According to testimonies by other witnesses and to his statement, when he went to the Security Department his arm was tied and he was in pain, which (in conjunction with the possible time of infliction of the injuries according to the hospital’s certificate) leads to the conclusion that they had been caused under unspecified circumstances before he voluntarily went to the Security Department at 12.40 a.m. that day. 66. According to the correspondence kept in our Service, none of the said Romanies filed a complaint against police officers.