Committee against Torture begins review of report of Ukraine

CAT
27th session
14 November 2001
Morning




Government Delegation Queried on NGO Reports of
Numerous Cases of Torture, 26 Resulting in Death



The Committee against Torture began consideration this morning of a fourth periodic report of Ukraine, questioning Government representatives on reported widespread ill-treatment of detainees and prisoners, including allegations of 26 cases of physical abuse resulting in death.

The Committee asked about information provided by a non-governmental organization (NGO) that some 30 per cent of prisoners were subject to torture; about reports of improper forced deportations; about charges that pre-trial detention was used for indefinite periods; and about the continued use of provisions from the former Soviet justice and criminal systems that appeared to violate the provisions of the Convention against Torture.

The delegation will respond to the questions at 3 p.m. on Thursday, 15 November.

The Ukrainian report was introduced by A. Zayets, First Deputy State Secretary of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, who said among other things that a law had been adopted in September specifically criminalizing torture; that the new State Penal Corrections Department had received increased funding and that special institutions were being established for those sentenced to life imprisonment; and that the Procurator's Department was authorized to receive complaints directly from prisoners without interference from prison officials.

In addition to Mr. Zayets, the Ukrainian delegation included M. Skuratovskyi, Permanent Representative of Ukraine to the United Nations Office at Geneva; V. Lyovochkin, Head of the State Department on the execution of sentences; L. Bykov, Deputy Head of Division of the Law and Justice Bodies of the Cabinet of Ministers; V. Demchenko, Director of the International Law Department of the Ministry of Justice; I. Zhylka, Director of the Department of oversight investigations of the Office of the Prosecutor General; A. Chyzhov, Second Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine; and I. Markina, Second Secretary of the Permanent Mission of Ukraine to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

Ukraine, as one of the 126 States parties to the Convention against Torture, is required to present periodic summations to the Committee of national efforts to put the Convention's provisions into effect. Government delegations generally appear before the Committee during the consideration of such reports to answer questions and provide additional information.

The Committee will reconvene in private session at 3 p.m. It will hold a public meeting at 10 a.m. on Thursday, 15 November to begin its review of an initial report of Benin.


Fourth periodic report of Ukraine

The report (CAT/C/55/Add.1) reviews implementation of the Convention on an article-by-article basis. The introduction notes, among other things, that Ukraine has withdrawn its initial reservations under articles 21 and 22 of the Convention, thus acknowledging the Committee's jurisdiction over its territory; that since the country's independence, numerous amendments have been made to the Corrective Labour Code, 'all of which have been designed to humanize and democratize the execution and serving of punishments and ensure that basic rights and freedoms are observed'; that in 1999 a Presidential decree transferred the State Penal Correction Department out of the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Internal Affairs; and that a special programme to improve custodial conditions has yielded an extra 26,200 places for individual prisoners but that nonetheless an increase in the inmate population is seriously exacerbating problems connected with accommodation, job placement, and the development of proper prison conditions.

Future reforms are intended as well, the report notes, among them a new Code for the Execution of Criminal Penalties which would bring national standards fully into line with international norms and would classify penal institutions with respect to their level of security. Among new procedures now in effect at correctional labour facilities are several designed to enhance freedom of religion and worship.


Introduction of report

A. ZAYETS, First Deputy State Secretary of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine, said the report focused on reforms introduced since the Committee's consideration of Ukraine's third periodic report. In June of this year, following the end of the 5-year transitional period under the country's new Constitution, a new Penal Code had been introduced, and amendments had been made to the Criminal and Civil Procedural Codes. These and other measures indicated a genuine commitment to judicial and legal reform. The death penalty had been recognized as incompatible with the Constitution and had been abolished.

The new Penal Code as of 1 September had a penalty establishing liability for committing torture, Mr. Zayets said; punishment for this crime included imprisonment of three to five years, or, if the offense was committed repeatedly, five to 10 years. The new State Penal Corrections Department had been receiving increased funding, and special institutions were being established for those sentenced to life imprisonment. Supervision of prison conditions was exercised by the Procurator's Department, and procurators were required to conduct inspections of correctional institutions; they also were authorized to receive complaints from prisoners and detainees. Such communications were sent directly, without interference from prison officials, and a response within 24 hours was required. An Ombudsman's Office also had been set up for the protection of the human rights of all Ukrainians.


Discussion

Members of the Committee put a number of questions to the Ukrainian delegation and asked the group to return at 3 p.m. on Thursday, 15 November, with their responses.

Serving as Rapporteur for the Ukrainian document was Committee Expert SAYED KASSEM EL MASRY. He said, among other things, that the report could have been more comprehensive -- in its review of some Convention articles it provided little or no information -- but nonetheless it was encouraging because of the numerous reforms it described. It also was encouraging that Ukraine now had accepted articles 21 and 22 of the Convention, and that it had abolished capital punishment.

Among Mr. el Masry's questions were what had been done to establish a comprehensive plan to eradicate torture, as recommended by the Committee following review of Ukraine's third periodic report, and if the new law criminalizing torture had a provision declaring inadmissible in court any evidence extracted under torture. Mr. el Masry also noted that the new law did not mention torture inflicted specifically by public officials, and asked if the measure thus also applied to private citizens.

A local non-governmental organization (NGO) had provided details on 174 cases of torture or ill-treatment of detainees, with 26 cases resulting in death, Mr. el Masry said. One case, described by the NGO as typical, involved someone who was detained for theft, brutally beaten, handcuffed, and who had a heavy weight thrown on his chest; 11 of his ribs were broken and his lungs injured, and later he died in the hospital; it also turned out that he was innocent of the charge for which he had been arrested.

Temporary restrictions of rights and freedoms were allowed under a law for prevention of threats to the State or crimes against the State, Mr. el Masry said, and he asked which rights could be so restricted and for how long. He also cited reports that frequent convictions were based on evidence extracted by torture or by coercion of pleas of guilty through application of torture. Further, one NGO had claimed that some 30 per cent of prisoners were subject to torture and that special militia troops regularly tortured inmates, including through the use of gas masks that restricted the flow of oxygen; and that requests for access to a lawyer were regularly met with beatings until the detainee or inmate waived his right to legal counsel.

Reports from NGOs indicated the situation was improving but was still far from acceptable, Mr. el Masry said, and the major problem appeared to be the persistence of judicial and court articles from the old Soviet system which had been maintained under the new criminal and penal codes, or in some cases made even more restrictive. Among these measures were provisions prohibiting 'subversive activities'.

The NGO Amnesty International furthermore reported a series of abuses related to forced deportations, he said, including a case where four men were forcibly deported to Uzbekistan after they had fled that country to avoid political persecution. Legislation appeared to lack sufficient protections for refugees and asylum-seekers, and for prevention of refoulement when persons deported would risk undergoing torture.

Mr. el Masry asked if detainees in fact had a thoroughly guaranteed, practically implemented, immediate access to legal counsel, as it had been claimed that there was often a gap between the time of arrest and visits by counsel during which ill-treatment occurred; in some cases, it was reported, access to counsel had been denied for up to two weeks. He further asked what the limit was for pre-trail detention, as there seemed under law to be the option of continuing it indefinitely and such cases had been alleged.

Serving as Co-Rapporteur for the Ukrainian report was Committee Expert OLE VEDEL RASMUSSEN, who said significant reforms had been introduced in Ukrainian legislation and the Committee looked forward to seeing how these new measures were implemented.

Among his questions were if more information could be provided on training given to prison and medical personnel on recognizing and preventing torture; if obtaining confessions was important for the advancement of the careers of investigating police officers, as reported by an NGO, which contended that several thousand cases of torture to elicit confessions occurred annually; if the delegation has statistics on how many complaints of torture of prisoners the country's Commissioner for Human Rights had received and what action had been taken in response; if the Commissioner could make unexpected visits to police stations, how many such visits had been carried out, and if cases of torture had been discovered; and if the country's Ombudsman for human rights had the right to visit police stations, detention centres, and prisons.

Mr. Rasmussen also asked about reports that 10 to 15 per cent of Ukrainian women had been raped and reports that women complaining of domestic violence had difficulties getting prosecutors to bring charges; and about overcrowding and unacceptable conditions in prisons and detention facilities.

Several other Committee members put questions. They asked, among other things, who authorized preliminary criminal investigations and what standards were employed; what standards justified pre-trial detention; and what had been done to end abuses committed during 'hazing' of military recruits.




* *** *