COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE BEGINS REVIEW OF REPORT FROM BULGARIA

17 May 2004

The Committee against Torture this morning began its consideration of the third periodic report of Bulgaria on how that country implements the provisions of the Convention against Torture.

The report was introduced by Dimiter Tzantchev, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Bulgaria to the United Nations Office at Geneva, who said his country fully shared the view that the strengthening of national capacity for the promotion and protection of human rights was a primary responsibility of States. Bulgaria was firmly committed to undertaking, developing and strengthening legislative, administrative and other necessary measures in that regard.

Mr. Tzantchev said Bulgaria had achieved substantive improvements in the protection and promotion of human rights in the country by taking decisive measures aimed at fully implementing the provisions of the international legal instruments to which the country was a party.

Committee Expert Alexander M. Yakovlev, who served as Co-Rapporteur for the Bulgarian report, said among other things that the report contained important information on measures taken to prevent torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. He welcomed the adoption of the code of police behaviour and the establishment of the office of the Ombudsman. He asked about conditions for expelling asylum seekers and the implementation of programmes with regard to minorities.

Serving as Rapporteur for the report was Committee Expert Felice Gaer who said the Committee had noted the progress made by Bulgaria in meeting its obligations under the Convention. She raised questions on the responsibilities of the perpetrators of torture; pre-trial detention; the situation of asylum seekers; the conditions of prison facilities; and monitoring inter-prison and sexual violence.

The Bulgarian delegation also included Andrei Tehov, Head of the Human Rights Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Rumen Vladimirov, Head of the Department of Law, New Bulgarian University; Dimitar Philipov, Deputy Permanent Representative of Bulgaria to United Nations Office at Geneva; Roumiana Mitreva, Counsellor at the Permanent Mission of Bulgaria in Geneva; Lili Valchanova, Senior Expert, Human Rights Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; and Darina Vladimirova, Interpreter.

Bulgaria, as one of the 136 States parties to the Convention against Torture, must provide the Committee with periodic reports on its efforts to put the Convention's provisions into effect.

The delegation will return to answer the Committee's questions at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 18 May. The Committee's formal conclusions and recommendations on the Bulgarian report will be issued at 10 a.m. on Friday, 21 May, after which the Committee will wrap up its three-week session.

The Committee will reconvene at 3 p.m. this afternoon in private to discuss draft conclusions on country reports already examined during this session as well as organizational matters.

Third Periodic Report of Bulgaria

The report of Bulgaria (CAT/C/34/Add.16) provides information on new measures and recent results regarding the implementation of articles 1 to 16 of the Convention against Torture. It says the established practice of providing the necessary conditions to ensure openness and transparency with regard to the problem of torture will continue. In the period under review, a number of legislative, administrative and other measures were adopted in the country in implementation of the Convention. Serious efforts were made to periodically renew internal legislation. The criminal code was amended and supplemented ten times; the code of criminal procedure seven times; and the Law on Punishment Enforcement four times. The most important positive change in the criminal code was the abolition in December 1998 of the death penalty, which for 100 years had been present in the law as an element of the penal system.

Presentation of Report

DIMITER TZANTCHEV, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Bulgaria to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said his country fully shared the view that the strengthening of national capacity for the promotion and protection of human rights was a primary responsibility of States. Bulgaria was also firmly committed to undertaking, developing and strengthening legislative, administrative and other necessary measures in that regard. Bulgaria was aware that this was an ongoing process which needed to be continually assessed and monitored both at the national and international levels. In recent years, Bulgaria had achieved substantive improvements in the protection and promotion of human rights in the country by taking decisive measures aimed at fully implementing the provisions of the international legal instruments to which it was a party.

Mr. Tzantchev said successive governments had been firmly committed to the noble cause of human rights and through their actions had contributed to the positive human rights record in which the Bulgarian people took modest, but justified pride, though the Government fully realized that no country in the world could claim to be perfect in that sphere.

Important progress in the implementation of the provisions and standards of the Convention against Torture had been achieved, particularly in the past two years when further decisive steps had been undertaken in order to ensure adequate protection for all persons against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, Mr. Tzantchev said.

RUMEN VLADIMIROV, Head of Department of Law, New Bulgarian University, briefly explained the contents of the report, saying a number of measures had been undertaken with the view to implementing the provisions of the Convention against Torture. Further measures had also been taken towards the monitoring of conditions of prisoners and those detained in psychiatric institutions. The obligatory medical examination of any detainees had been introduced. The Ministry of Health had introduced steps to respect international standards in handling individuals in psychiatric clinics. The Government had continued to take legislative, administrative and juridical measures to respect the provisions of the Convention.

Response to Written Questions Asked in Advance

ANDREI TEHOV, Head of the Human Rights Department at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bulgaria, responding to written questions prepared by the Committee and addressed to the State party in advance, emphasized that stringent legal safeguards against torture were provided in Bulgaria. The law provided that no one might be subjected to medical, scientific or other experimentation without his or her voluntary written consent. The Constitution proclaimed the right to liberty and inviolability of person as a fundamental right of the citizens of Bulgaria.

On access to a lawyer and family members by a detainee, Mr. Tehov said effective procedural guarantees for the respect of the human rights of detainees were contained in the Constitution and in different laws and by-laws. Persons detained by the police should be immediately informed of their rights: to have access to a doctor and to a lawyer; to appear before a court; and to contact relatives. Proposals had been made by the Standing Working Group on Human Rights to amend the relevant legislation and secure funds so as to provide medical examinations free of charge.

Concerning allegations that legal representation for all detainees at the pre-trial stage was not guaranteed, the delegation said that contrary to allegations, legal representation for all detainees at the pre-trial stage was indeed guaranteed, in fact, it was obligatory. The detainee should declare his or her wish for free legal representation. That wish was duly recorded in the protocol and the necessary arrangements were made, while the cost of such free legal aid was assumed by the State.

Asked whether the code of conduct of the policeman was adopted, Mr. Tehov said it had been adopted and introduced into practice by order of the Minister of the Interior in October 2002. The code contained explicit provisions aimed at preventing torture and ill treatment.

With regard to allegations that torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment by police continued to take place throughout the country, and that ethnic minorities and especially Roma were in greater risk of being victims of such acts, Mr. Tehov said that the Bulgarian authorities were aware of the fact that despite their consistent efforts, isolated cases of ill-treatment by the police did continue to occur. However, multiple measures were being taken to address the problem. The problems encountered by many members of the Roma in Bulgaria were mainly socio-economic in nature. The authorities were aware of the magnitude of those problems and had largely identified their root causes. A plan of action had been implemented to address the problems of the Roma community, including equal access to education, employment, health care and improvement of housing conditions.

With regards to the training of medical personnel dealing with persons in detention or imprisoned to enable them to recognize signs of torture, Mr. Tehov said that in 2003, the medical personnel of the investigative detention facilities went through training including familiarization with the regulatory framework, professional ethnics and communication with patients who were persons in detention. The medical officers studied in detail the international standard rules concerning medical services at places of deprivation of liberty and the treatment of prisoners, as well as the standards of international law on the prevention and prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

On measures towards the demilitarisation of prison personnel, Mr. Tehov said the Ministry of Justice implemented overall responsibility for the management of places of deprivation of liberty and control over their operations. The demilitarisation of the penitentiary personnel was effected pursuant to the amendments to the Law on Punishment Enforcement adopted in June 1998. Currently, only the personnel engaged directly and immediately in guard duties at the places of deprivation of liberty and the investigative detention facilities were still militarized.

Only 14 complaints of alleged torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment were received from recruits in the period up to 2002, Mr. Tehov said. Investigations had been carried out on all those complaints. In six of the cases, the information was confirmed, and in eight cases, the complaints were unfounded.

Victims of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment by law enforcement personnel might seek compensation both through civil and criminal proceedings, Mr. Tehov said. However, no statistics with respect to compensation awarded for such acts through civil or criminal proceedings existed, as there were a very large number of such cases.

Juvenile detainees were placed in special premises separately from adults and their parents or legal guardians and the director of the relevant educational establishment was immediately informed, Mr. Tehov said. The police might detain juveniles who had committed a crime and minors who had escaped from their homes, their legal guardians or the social homes where they had been placed. Detention might not be for more than 24 hours. If the reason for their detention was no longer valid, they should be freed immediately.

In May 2003, the National Assembly adopted the Law on Ombudsman, and in the process of its elaboration, the valuable recommendations provided by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights were fully taken into account. The Law provided for the establishment of the Ombudsman as an additional safeguard for the promotion and protection of citizens’ rights and freedoms in their relations with the public authorities.

Discussion

ALEXANDER M. YAKOVLEV, the Committee Expert who served as Co-Rapporteur for the report of Bulgaria, said the report contained important information on measures taken to prevent torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Further measures were taken at the legislative and administrative levels to punish perpetrators of torture or ill treatment.

Mr. Yakovlev welcomed the adoption of the code of police behaviour and the establishment of the office of the Ombudsman. The scope of the Ombudsman in monitoring human rights observance should be known. The criminal code of Bulgaria should explicitly include prohibition of the practice of torture, taking into account the elements enumerated in article 1 of the Convention against Torture.

On the issue of expulsion, Mr. Yakovlev wanted to receive information on the criteria of expulsion based on threats of national security or committing acts of terrorism. He asked if the State party took into consideration the risk encountered by the individual in the country he was being expelled to.

Major progress had been made with regard to minorities in Bulgaria, Mr. Yakovlev, said. However, the rules on paper should be translated into practice in order to obtain results.

FELICE GAER, the Committee Expert who served as Rapporteur, said the Committee had noted progress made by Bulgaria in meeting its obligations under the Convention against Torture. The information provided to the Committee on the penal code did not seem to fully address torture and the accountability of the person who committed it.

Referring to the case raised by the delegation on the six Bulgarians sentenced to death in Libya, Ms. Gaer said Bulgaria could have invoked article 21 of the Convention which stipulated that a State party could claim that another State party was not fulfilling its obligations under the Convention. However, while Bulgaria recognized article 21, Libya did not.

Ms. Gaer said that according to non-governmental organizations, pre-trial detention conditions in Bulgaria were the worst.

In 2002, out of 3,000 asylum seekers, only 72 had been granted asylum status and about 600 were given humanitarian permits, Ms. Gaer said. What happened to the remaining individuals? What guarantees were provided so that prisoners were kept in facilities whose conditions met international minimum standards?

Ms. Gaer asked if the State party was monitoring inter-prisoner and sexual violence in prisons.

Other Committee Experts also asked, among other things, about prison conditions; lawful sanctions against minors; on the findings of the non-governmental organizations with regards to human rights in Bulgaria; excessive use of firearms; length of incommunicado detention under pre-trial custody; and procedures for asylum seekers at airports.