COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE BEGINS REVIEW OF REPORT OF ZAMBIA

CAT
27th session
19 November 2001
Morning





Government Delegation Questioned on Court Admissibility
of Evidence Extracted by Torture,
Lack of Legal Protection against Maltreatment



The Committee against Torture began its consideration this morning of an initial report of Zambia, querying a Government delegation on the effects of widespread poverty on efforts to improve police and prison operations and on the lack of a domestic law defining and prohibiting torture.

Committee members also asked why a study had not been carried out prior to Zambia's ratification of the Convention against Torture to assess the compatibility of Zambian legislation with the standards of the treaty. They said that was the usual practice, and noted that there was an extensive "lack of consonance" between the Zambian legal regime and the Convention, decrying, for example, a current situation in which -- the report admitted -- evidence extracted by torture was admissible in court, leading to widespread maltreatment of suspects by police officers, and corporal punishment of prisoners was allowed.

The Zambian delegation will respond to the questions on Tuesday, 20 November in the afternoon.

The Zambian report was introduced by B.C. Mutale, the country's Attorney General, who said among other things that an office of Custody Constable had been established at all police stations so that someone was always monitoring the treatment and condition of detainees; that a police complaint authority had been set up; and that there had been recent amendments to the Penal Code, Criminal Procedure Code, and Prisons Act.

Other members of the delegation included R.C. Sampa, Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Legal Affairs; B.M. Bowa, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Zambia to the United Nations Office at Geneva; J.B. Fundafunda, Counsellor at the Permanent Mission; E.T. Sinjela, First Secretary at the Mission; and M. Mapani and P. Nulonda, Senior State Advocates of the Ministry of Legal Affairs.

Zambia, as one of the 126 States parties to the Convention against Torture, is required to present periodic summations to the Committee on 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 at 3 p.m. to continue its review of an initial report of Indonesia.


Initial report of Zambia

The report (CAT/C/47/Add.2) reviews the implementation of the Convention on an article-by-article basis. It notes in its introduction that initiatives have been taken to adopt a specific definition and crime of torture; also lacking are a definition of torture in the Constitution (although the Constitution prohibits torture), financial resources to conduct systematic reviews of interrogation rules, methods and practices; communication facilities for law-enforcement institutions in remote areas; and general knowledge of human rights and of the provisions of the Convention.

Although the mandate of the Human Rights Commission of Zambia includes investigating complaints of torture, the report states, its findings lead only to recommendations which have no legal effect, although the Government and its agents are expected to act on the recommendations. Similarly, the country's Public Police Complaints Authority is only allowed to make recommendations. An additional weakness is that junior officers in Zambia are bound to obey the orders of their superiors, the report says, and it is practically difficult for such a subordinate to refuse a superior's demand to carry out acts that might amount to ill-treatment.

Among legislation tailored to prevent and eliminate cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, according to the report, is a police amendment Act outlining standards for police custody; a Prisons Act providing standards for management and control of inmates; and a Refugees (Control) Act guaranteeing refugees protection from refoulement.

The Constitutional article prohibiting torture is non-derogable, the report notes, and persons who have been victims of torture may petition the High Court of Zambia for redress, or directly sue the Attorney-General for damages. In addition, various administrative measures have been taken which require law-enforcement training institutions to include human rights instruction.


Introduction of report

B.C. MUTALE, Attorney General of Zambia, said in an introductory statement that the Government had withdrawn its reservation to article 20 of the Convention and that the compilation of the report had been an "eye-opener" for the Government, as it had made apparent various legal and administrative shortcomings. In the year since the report was submitted, steps had been taken to address some of those problems. The Convention against Torture had not been incorporated into domestic law, largely because resources had been lacking to carry out a study of its compatibility with existing legislation, but recently the Government had decided to prioritize programmes to bring the country in line with United Nations instruments Zambia had ratified.

An office of Custody Constable had been established at all police stations so that someone was always monitoring the treatment and condition of detainees, Mr. Mutale said. A police complaint authority also had been set up. There had been recent amendments to the Penal Code, Criminal Procedure Code, and Prisons Act. Plans were under way to repeal and replace the outdated 1965 Prisons Act to take into account international standards. And, in cooperation with UNICEF, a Juvenile Justice Administration Scheme was being implemented to improve the handling of juveniles who came into contact with the criminal justice system.

Many of the complaints against the police were based on methods of interrogation, Mr. Mutale said, and the Government with support from cooperating partners had rehabilitated and computerized the police forensic laboratory to improve information gathering by other means. That had brought down the number of complaints against the police. The police Order of Conduct provided penalties for officers found guilty of criminal or disciplinary offenses; those committing criminal offenses were treated just like other criminal suspects, while those charged with disciplinary offenses appeared before a police tribunal which could recommend dismissal. In many cases, officers had been charged with criminal offenses and had been suspended, tried, and punished, including for inflicting injury on suspects and for extra-judicial killings.

Steps were being taken to improve food and clothing and reduce overcrowding in prisons; to attack Government corruption; and to articulate a prosecutions policy which would make prosecutions more humane, Mr. Mutale said.


Discussion

Serving as Rapporteur on the situation in Zambia was Committee Expert ANDREAS MAVROMMATIS, who termed the report candid and frank, adding that it was an indication that there was political will in Zambia "to do the right thing". It was clear that there was a wide lack of consonance between Zambian law and the standards of the Convention, as the report noted, Mr. Mavrommatis said. That was in part because the treaty had been ratified without a study of national legislation being carried out in advance, which was usually done.

The country's dire socio-economic conditions could not be used to justify violations of the Convention, he said, but on the other hand they helped to explain them -- such severe poverty often led to crime, and an underfunded, undertrained and often over-taxed police force used ill-treatment in their efforts to cope. It would be useful if the Government ratified the article of the Convention allowing individual complaints, and incorporation of the Convention into Zambian law was clearly vital, and should not be overly expensive.

Among Mr. Mavrommatis's questions were how the Human Rights Commission was guaranteed independence from the Government and how its effectiveness was ensured; whether allegations of two cases of torture related to a failed 1997 coup would be brought to trial, as he understood evidence existed and suspects had been identified; if there was a system of legal aid for indigent suspects and detainees; if a crime of torture, including a definition along the lines given in the Convention, could be created; and if, as appeared, policemen could claim "orders of a superior officer" as an excuse for torture.

Mr. Mavrommatis also asked how effectively the Human Rights Commission operated at regional and local levels; if the police complaints authority had been staffed and given a budget; how the complaints authority's independence and effectiveness were ensured; why there was no legislation of any kind asserting Zambia's jurisdiction to prosecute an act of torture committed on a plane or ship registered in Zambia; if the Government was liable for damages if one of its officials committed torture; if the police had assisted in specific cases of allegations of torture; and if information could be given on the case of a girl who had been sent to the police for cheating on an examination, and who had died while in police custody.

Mr. Mavrommatis asked if street children, who numbered in the thousands, were harassed and ill-treated by the police, as alleged, and if the Government had any programmes for easing the plight of street children; and if tribal laws allowed polygamy, "purification", and an obligation of wives to have sex with their spouses' relatives, as alleged, and if so what protections the Government provided women in such cases.

Serving as Co-Rapporteur on the Zambian report was Committee Expert OLE VEDEL RASMUSSEN. Among his questions were why evidence elicited through torture was admissible in court, and why policemen appeared to enjoy impunity for acts of ill-treatment; if interrogation rules, methods and practices could be reviewed for compliance with the Convention; if detainees had access to legal counsel and family members; how promptly detainees were brought before a judge; if there had been any recent states of emergency; if the current system, under which most prosecutors were "police prosecutors", making investigations of alleged police maltreatment difficult to carry out, could be changed; and how many complaints the police complaints authority had received, and what had resulted from the complaints.

Mr. Rasmussen also asked what were the major findings of a Government report on the failed 1997 coup, as related to torture; if flogging of prisoners was allowed; if corporal punishment of minors held in detention was allowed; and what was meant by an "open-air prison".

Other Committee members put questions, asking among other things, why the country's "dual" legal system should be an impediment to implementing the Convention; what was being done to increase protection for women prisoners and detainees, who allegedly were often sexually abused and even raped; and what was being done to reduce a high incidence of rape in general in the country and to increase the apparently mild punishments, if any, that resulted.




* *** *