A/HRC/36/31 due process guarantees due to a number of irregularities, the activists were sentenced in August 2016 to imprisonment, ranging from three to fifteen years. The communication sent to the Government expressed concern that the Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights indicated that the authorities had possibly targeted IRA activists as reprisal for their cooperation with the visit of the Special Rapporteur. Another communication sent by mandate holders on 19 October 2016 further addressed the situation of IRA members, recalling that the Special Rapporteur had met IRA members during his visit. In a letter dated 19 October 2016, the Government responded by denying allegations of torture, and stating that the judicial process scrupulously respected international human rights standards. The Government’s reply did not address the allegations of reprisals. 13. Mexico 49. On 4 August 2015, the Committee against Torture, in Ramirez et al. v. Mexico, found a violation of articles 1, 2 (1), 12-15 and 22 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (see CAT/C/55/D/500/2012 and communication No. 500/2012). On 19 May and 19 September 2016, the complainants submitted that they had suffered acts of intimidation and harassment by the authorities as a result of the Committee’s decision. 50. The complainants noted that the State party had undertaken a campaign aimed at stigmatizing them as criminals and re-victimising them. According to reports, a few days after the release of the Committee’s decision, the Delegate of the Attorney General’s Office for the Baja California province declared before the media that torture allegations were a “common strategy used by lawyers defending criminals in order to obtain their release or suspend the proceedings against them”. According to information received, several printed media published articles referring to the complainants as “kidnappers released by the United Nations.” Television programs stigmatized the NGO that represented the complainants before the Committee, stating that the Committee had enabled an organised criminal network supporting kidnappers. 51. Despite having been acquitted in the criminal case against them, two of the complainants were detained again a few hours after having been released based on an alleged arrest warrant dating from 2009 and without a judicial decision. As at 31 July 2017 they were being held in the punishment cells of a penitentiary centre together with convicted detainees, and have been subjected to ill-treatment. Following the release of the other two complainants, the two complainants who remained in detention have been repeatedly harassed by the police, subjected to random arrests and interrogations and called “kidnappers”. Their family members have also been harassed by the police. One of the complainants has had his workplace searched on several occasions and without a warrant. 52. In September 2016, the complainants’ submission was transmitted to the State party for observations. The rapporteurs on reprisals and on follow-up requested that the State party adopt all measures necessary to protect the security and integrity of the complainants, their family members and representatives, and inform the Committee accordingly. No response was received from the Government, and the Committee sent a reminder at its 59th session (see CAT/C/59/3). 14. Morocco 53. On 3 August 2016, the Committee against Torture, in Abdul Rahman Alhaj Ali v. Morocco, found a that the extradition of Abdul Rahman Alhaj Ali would constitute a breach of article 3 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (see CAT C/58/D/682/2015 and communication No. 682/2015). Mr. Abdul Rahman Alhaj Ali, a Syrian national registered with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and seeking asylum in Morocco, was detained in October 2014 in Morocco on an extradition request by Saudi Arabia for “breach of trust” based on previous business relations in Riyadh. The Committee urged the Government to release him or to try him if charges are brought against him in Morocco, as he had been in extradition detention 24