Africa The lack of prompt and expeditious investigations in torture cases is a marked problem in many African countries. The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights has issued the Robben Island Guidelines,3 which specify in detail states parties’ obligations to investigate torture cases promptly and effectively. The Commission has also issued several decisions in which it urged states parties to investigate torture cases though state compliance has been weak.4 Sudan Farouk Mohamed Ibrahim El Nur, a professor at Khartoum University, was arrested on 30 November 1989. He was taken to the National Security Headquarters and was blindfolded and driven to a ‘ghost house’ where he was kicked, beaten and flogged and subjected to sleep deprivation. He sent a complaint to the President of Sudan on 29 February 1990 which detailed the torture and the names of those responsible. The complaint also requested his immediate release and for an investigation to be opened against the crimes that had been perpetrated against him “in violation of custom, morality, religion and law.” 5 In spite of strong medical evidence and a number of witnesses to the torture, no investigation was opened, not least because the alleged perpetrators, including some high-ranking officials, enjoyed immunity. Under Sudanese law, a criminal offence committed by an official can only be investigated and prosecuted if the head of the relevant authority grants approval and lifts immunity.6 Professor El Nur sent a letter to President Bashir in November 2000, in which he asked the President to take action, outlining three options, namely, i) truth, apology and mutual reconciliation; ii) prosecution before national courts; or iii) prosecution before international human rights courts. The letter went unheeded. In 2006, after the establishment of a new Constitutional Court in Sudan, Professor El Nur’s lawyers sent a letter to the Attorney-General of Sudan, requesting him to prosecute those responsible, notwithstanding immunity laws and statutes of limitation which they argued where contrary to constitutional rights and international human rights standards. As there was no reply, Professor El Nur instructed his lawyers to file a constitutional petition challenging the legality of the immunity and prescription laws that blocked investigations and prosecutions in his case. The Constitutional Court of Sudan declared his case admissible in March 2006. At the time of writing, the case was still pending. In practice, immunity is rarely lifted or investigations remain open indefinitely without a decision on the lifting of immunity. The perverse result in cases such as Professor El Nur’s is 3 Guidelines and Measures for the Prohibition and Prevention of Torture, Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in Africa (The Robben Island Guidelines), African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights, 32nd Session, 17 23 October, 2002, Banjul, The Gambia. 4 Frans Viljoen and Lirette Louw, State Compliance with the Recommendations of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 1993-2004, in 1 American Journal of International Law, Vol. 101 (January 2007), pp.1-34. 5 Letter sent by Professor Farouk Mohamed Ibrahim to President Omar El Beshir on 13 November 2000, in: Amin Mekki Medani, Crimes against International Humanitarian Law in Sudan, 1989-2000, pp.276 et seq. 6 See in particular Article 46 of the Police Forces Act of 1999 and Article 33 of the National Security Forces Act of 1999. 6