A/HRC/30/29 restrictions would be placed on anyone in the future. It also recommended that allegations that State agencies censored reports submitted by non-governmental organizations be investigated, and that preventive measures for non-occurrence be taken. When requested to comment on these concerns during the consideration of the report, a member of the delegation of China stated that the Government welcomed the efforts of non-governmental and civil society organizations to promote women’s rights and that they were not subject to reprisals of any kind for their work (CEDAW/C/SR.1251, para. 61). 4. Cyprus 18. On 5 June 2014, the Committee against Torture, in a letter on reprisals, and a number of special procedure mandate holders referred to allegations of reprisals against Doros Polykarpou, Executive Director of Action for Support, Equality and Antiracism, for having submitted an alternative report on the situation of detained undocumented migrants, including at the Mennogeia Detention Centre, to the Committee prior to the consideration of the State’s fourth periodic report (CAT/C/CYP/4) at its fifty-second session (see also A/HRC/28/85, case CYP 3/2014). On 29 May 2014, a few days after the Committee published its concluding observations, Mr. Polykarpou was reportedly arrested upon arrival at the detention centre by its administration for failing to pay a parking fine and transferred to the Central Prison in Nicosia, placed in a wing with convicted prisoners and denied access to a lawyer and drinking water. Mr. Polykarpou was released later that day after his organization paid the fine. The Government, in its response of 5 August 2014 to a communication by mandate holders, stressed that it attributed great significance to human rights instruments and had provided information on the arrest warrants issued against Mr. Polykarpou (see A/HRC/28/85, case CYP 3/2014). Taking into account the seriousness of the allegations, the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, in his report submitted to the Human Rights Council at its twentyeighth session, requested additional information (A/HRC/28/68/Add.1, paras. 130-133). At the time of finalization of the present report, the Government had not responded to the latest request of the Special Rapporteur or the letters addressed by the Committee. 5. Eritrea 19. The risk of reprisals against anyone cooperating with the commission of inquiry on human rights in Eritrea, or their relatives still residing in the country, was one of the main challenges that the commission faced in carrying out its mandate. Regardless of the country or location, almost all victims and witnesses in contact with the commission assumed that they were still being monitored in secret and were afraid to testify, even on a confidential basis, out of fear for reprisals by the Eritrean authorities against themselves and their family members residing in Eritrea. The commission witnessed one specific episode of such monitoring, and recalled that it is the primary responsibility of the States of nationality or residence to protect all persons who cooperated with it, and urged Member States to provide additional protection where necessary (A/HRC/29/42, paras. 17-18). During the interactive dialogue on the report at the twenty-ninth session of the Human Rights Council, the Government did not address the allegations of reprisals. 6. Gambia 20. The Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions reported that their joint visit to the Gambia early in November 2014 had been conducted in an atmosphere of apprehension and genuine fear among civil society, victims, witnesses and other interlocutors about possible reprisals (A/HRC/28/68/Add.4, para. 96, 7