لجنة مناهضة التعذيب تناقش متابعة الملاحظات الختامية والتوصيات، ومسألة الأعمال الانتقامية

Committee against Torture

20 November 2014

The Committee against Torture this morning considered the issue of follow-up to concluding observations and recommendations and to individual communications, and the issue of reprisals, hearing oral presentations by Committee members Jens Modvig, Rapporteur on follow-up to concluding observations, Satyabhoosun Gupt Domah, Rapporteur on follow-up to individual communications, and George Tugushi, Rapporteur on reprisals.

Presenting the report on follow-up to article 19 on concluding observations, Mr. Modvig said that during the reporting period from July to November 2014, follow-up reports were due from eight countries, not counting overdue reports, and five reports had been received, representing a 62.5 per cent response rate.  The implementation rate was lower than this and was an issue for further study.  Mr. Modvig noted that the treaty bodies strengthening process and the Convention against Torture Initiative to ensure universal ratification and compliance with the Convention in 10 years had set the arena for the Committee to find ways of strengthening and making the most of the follow up procedure.

Mr. Domah presented his report on compliance with individual communications based on article 22 and briefed the Committee on individual cases from 11 States: Tunisia, Norway, Sweden, Ukraine, Morocco, Australia, Germany, Kazakhstan, Switzerland, Finland and Burundi. 

Concerning reprisals, Mr. Tugushi provided status update on two cases considered by the Committee, one related to threats and imprisonment of the director of the local non-governmental organization Action for Support, Equality and Anti-racism from Cyprus, and the case of the director of the Cross-cultural Organization from Thailand, which was in charge of monitoring cases of torture in the country, and had actually submitted a shadow report to the Committee against Torture. 

The Committee will reconvene in public on Friday, 28 November to release its concluding observations and recommendations on the reports of Sweden, Ukraine, Venezuela, Australia, Burundi, Croatia, United States and Kazakhstan, adopt the programme of work for the next session and close its fifty-third session.

Discussion

JENS MODVIG, Committee Expert and Rapporteur on follow-up to concluding observations, said that the follow-up procedure was an important way of assessing compliance with the Convention against Torture, and it focused on four key areas, namely: access to the fundamental legal safeguards in connection with deprivation of liberty; prompt, impartial and effective investigations of allegations of torture and ill-treatment; prosecution of persons accused of torture and sentencing of those found guilty; and redress and compensation to victims of torture.  The number of recommendations identified for follow-up was limited to four, and they appeared at the end of the concluding observations of the Committee.  Civil society organizations had the possibility to submit shadow reports or communicate with the Committee in other ways, which was fundamental in order to obtain the full picture of the State’s  implementation of its recommendations. 

During the reporting period from July to November 2014, follow-up reports were due from eight countries, not counting overdue reports; five reports had been received, from Estonia, United Kingdom, Guatemala, the Netherlands and Kenya, representing a compliance rate of 62.5 per cent, which was not much different from the most recent years.  The Committee also received the report of Turkmenistan which had been due in June 2012, and reports from non-State agencies from Peru, Ireland and the Netherlands, and from non-governmental organizations and individuals.  Mr. Modvig suggested that the implementation rate, which was different from the 60 per cent response rate, should be further studied.

Concerning strengthening of the procedure, Mr. Modvig said that two overriding questions were how to strengthen compliance with the Convention and how the results could be measured.  In light of the treaty bodies strengthening process and the Convention against Torture Initiative to ensure universal ratification and compliance with the Convention in 10 years, the arena had been set for the Committee to work out ways to make the most out of, inter alia, the follow-up procedure.  This would be discussed during the upcoming retreat.

In the ensuing discussion, Experts noted the declining rate of responses and the irregular reporting by States whose periodic reports were overdue and wondered how the follow-up procedure could be used to strengthen the reporting procedures, and to be linked to the list of issues prior to reporting.

Mr. Modvig said that there were no signs of the declining rate of responses by State parties and that the compliance rate for the reporting period was about 62 per cent; the overall response rate, which included also overdue reports, was considerably higher. 

SATYABHOOSUN GUPT DOMAH, Committee Expert and Rapporteur on follow-up to individual communications, presented his report on compliance with individual communications based on article 22 and which included information on individual cases from 11 States; Tunisia,  Norway, Sweden, Ukraine, Morocco, Australia, Germany, Kazakhstan, Switzerland, Finland and Burundi. 

Concerning the case of Mr. Salem from Tunisia, Committee Experts suggested that the Committee send a letter to Tunisia as a reminder of the measures that should still be implemented, followed up by a meeting with representatives of the State.  Mr. Domah noted that the State party was claiming that the matter had been before the investigating judge and that the executive could not interfere with the independent judiciary.

GEORGE TUGUSHI, Committee Vice-Chairperson and Rapporteur on reprisals, informed the Committee about the status of two cases considered by the Committee, one concerning threats and imprisonment of the director of local non-governmental organization Action for Support, Equality and Anti-racism from Cyprus, and the second was the case of the director of the Cross-cultural Organization from Thailand, which was in charge of monitoring cases of torture in the country, and had actually submitted a shadow report to the Committee against Torture. 

ALESSIO BRUNI, Committee Expert updated the Committee about previous cases of reprisals, and said that additional information concerning those cases and concerning the threat and fear of reprisals would be provided in closed session and would be discussed during the retreat.

_________

For use of the information media; not an official record