COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE CONCLUDES TWENTY-EIGHTH SESSION

CAT
28th session
17 May 2002
Morning


ROUND UP RELEASE



Considered Reports of Sweden, Uzbekistan, Denmark,
Norway, Luxembourg, Saudi Arabia and Russian Federation




The Committee against Torture concluded today a spring three-week session during which it reviewed reports from Sweden, Uzbekistan, Denmark, Norway, Saudi Arabia and the Russian Federation on efforts to comply with the Convention against Torture.
In addition to submitting reports, these Governments sent delegations before the panel of 10 independent Experts to answer questions. The countries are among the 129 States parties to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
In formal conclusions and recommendations on the report of Sweden, the Committee urged that the definition of torture set out in article 1 of the Convention be incorporated into Swedish domestic law; and that Sweden ensure that all allegations of violations committed by police personnel and prison guards be investigated promptly and impartially. Among positive developments in the country, the Committee said, were adoption of a national action plan for human rights for the years 2002-2004 and the establishment of an official Parliamentary committee to determine whether the existing framework for handling allegations of criminal actions by the police was satisfactory.
The panel called for Uzbekistan to establish a fully independent complaints mechanism for persons held in official custody and ensure prompt and impartial investigations into the many allegations of torture reported to authorities; and for it to ensure absolute respect for inadmissibility of evidence obtained by torture. It said positive aspects of the situation in the country included introduction of a draft law to allow citizens to file complaints of torture and establishment of an appeals system for court sentences.
The Committee recommended that Denmark establish adequate penal provisions to make torture a punishable offense in accordance with the Convention; and that it continue to monitor the effects of solitary confinement on detainees and the effects of a new bill which had reduced the grounds that could give rise to solitary confinement. It said positive aspects of the Danish report included the country's maintenance of a high level of respect for human rights in general and the active role it played internationally in the fight against torture; and the recommendation made by a committee set up by the Danish Ministry of Justice to incorporate the six main United Nations human rights treaties into Danish domestic law.
The Committee recommended that proposed legislation for introducing the offense of torture into the Norwegian penal system be enacted; and that information on the outcome of proposals for amendments to the Criminal Procedure Act on the issue of solitary confinement be included in the next report to the Committee. Positive developments in Norway, according to the Committee, included adoption of a plan of action for human rights for 2000-2004 and the proposed inclusion of a specific crime of torture in domestic law.
The panel urged Luxembourg to refrain from placing minors in adult prisons for disciplinary purposes; and said solitary confinement should be strictly and specifically regulated by law and applied only in severe circumstances. It cited as positive that the country had addressed in detail all matters of concern and previous recommendations made by the Committee; and that a specific crime of torture had been incorporated into the country's Penal Code.
The Committee recommended that Saudi Arabia re-examine the imposition by judicial and administrative authorities of corporal punishments, in particular flogging and amputation, that were not in conformity with the Convention against Torture; and that it ensure that its laws were in practice applied equally regardless of nationality, gender, religious affiliation or other distinctions. Among positive developments in Saudi Arabia, the Committee said, were newly promulgated Codes of Civil Procedure, Criminal Procedure and Practice for Lawyers; and the competence of a Board of Grievances to hear allegations of violations of human rights.
The panel said the Russian Federation should ensure absolute respect for the principle of inadmissibility of evidence obtained by torture and should review cases of convictions based solely on confessions; and that it should ensure prompt, impartial and full investigations into many allegations of torture reported to the authorities, including in Chechnya. Noted among positive aspects to the situation in the country were introduction of a new Criminal Code and a new Code of Criminal Procedure and transfer of the penal correction system from the authority of the Ministry of the Interior to the authority of the Ministry of Justice.
In addition to reviewing country reports in public session, the Committee considered in private meetings information appearing to contain well-founded indications that torture was being systematically practiced on the territories of some States parties. And it examined communications from individuals claiming to be victims of violations by States parties of the provisions of the Convention. Such communications are accepted only if they concern the 49 States that have declared the Committee competent to receive complaints under article 22 of the Convention.
The Committee also held a discussion of the situation in the occupied Palestinian territory in light of the Convention, deciding on a show-of-hands vote of 9 in favour and 1 opposed to have its recently created position of Rapporteur on follow up of recommendations made by the Committee on periodic reports give attention to the matter "in the course of general activities". The Committee considered a report of Israel at its November 2001 session.
The Committee's next session will be from 11 to 22 November, 2002. The panel is expected to consider reports from Venezuela, Spain, Egypt, Estonia, and Cyprus.

Conclusions and Recommendations on Country Reports
The Committee cited among positive developments in Sweden the adoption of a national action plan for human rights for the years 2002-2004 and the establishment in December 2000 of an official Parliamentary committee to determine whether the existing framework for handling allegations of criminal actions by the police was satisfactory.
Among concerns expressed were that there had been several cases of excessive use of force by police personnel and prison guards, leading to the deaths of the persons concerned, in recent years, and that there were allegations that guidelines given to police personnel and prison guards regarding the use of force were often subjective and imprecise.
The Committee recommended, among other things, that the definition of torture set out in article 1 of the Convention be incorporated into Swedish domestic law; that Sweden ensure that if foreigners were sent back, they were sent back to a country of their choice, or, at all events, a country with which they had real ties and where there was not a risk that they would be subject to torture; that Sweden ensure that all allegations of violations committed by police personnel and prison guards were investigated promptly and impartially; and that it ensure that the prohibition on the use of statements obtained under duress as evidence in court proceedings was clearly spelled out in domestic law.
Among positive aspects of the report of Uzbekistan, the Committee noted introduction of a draft law to allow citizens to file complaints of torture; assurances that the State party was determined to establish an independent judiciary; and establishment of an appeals system for court sentences.
Concern was cited, among other things, over particularly numerous, ongoing, and consistent allegations of acts of torture and other cruel treatment committed by law-enforcement personnel; an insufficient level of independence and effectiveness of the procuracy; and an absence of transparency in the criminal justice system.
Among the Committee's recommendations were that Uzbekistan promptly proceed with plans to amend domestic penal law to include the crime of torture as defined in article 1 of the Convention; establish a fully independent complaints mechanism for persons held in official custody and ensure prompt and impartial investigations into the many allegations of torture reported to authorities; ensure absolute respect for inadmissibility of evidence obtained by torture; permit detainees access to lawyers, doctors, and family members from the time they were taken into custody; maintain a register with the names of all detainees; and review cases of convictions based solely on confessions in the period since Uzbekistan became a party to the Convention, recognizing that many of these might have been obtained through torture or ill-treatment.
The Committee cited among positive aspects to the report of Denmark the country's maintenance of a high level of respect for human rights in general and the active role it played internationally in the fight against torture; and the recommendation made by a committee set up by the Danish Ministry of Justice to incorporate the six main United Nations human rights treaties into Danish domestic law.
Noted among subjects of concern were lack of a specific offense of torture punishable by appropriate penalties; and lack of effective recourse procedures against decisions imposing solitary confinement upon persons serving sentences.
The Committee recommended among other things that Denmark ensure speedy implementation of the recommendation of its Ad Hoc Committee regarding incorporating the Convention into Danish domestic law; that it establish adequate penal provisions to make torture a punishable offense in accordance with the Convention; that it continue to monitor the effects of solitary confinement on detainees and the effects of a new bill which had reduced the grounds that could give rise to solitary confinement; and that it ensure that the law governing solitary confinement for convicted prisoners establish adequate review mechanisms.
Among positive developments in Norway, according to the Committee, were adoption of a Plan of Action for Human Rights for 2000-2004 and a proposal to incorporate a new provision into the Penal Code to prohibit and penalize torture in conformity with article 1 of the Convention.
The only topic of concern noted by the Committee was Norway's use of pre-trial solitary confinement.
The Committee recommended that the proposed legislation introducing the offense of torture into the Norwegian penal system in conformity with article 1 of the Convention be enacted; that information on the outcome of proposals for amendments to the Criminal Procedure Act on the issue of solitary confinement be included in the next report to the Committee; and that information on proposed amendments to the Aliens Act on the basis of Security Council resolution 1373 (2001) on international cooperation to combat terrorism also be included in Norway's next periodic report.
The Committee noted among positive developments in Luxembourg that the country had addressed in detail all matters of concern and previous recommendations made by the Committee; and that a specific crime of torture had been incorporated into the country's Penal Code.
Concern was expressed that minors ordered to be placed in disciplinary centres were put in adult prisons; and that solitary confinement was used, particularly as a preventive measure during pre-trial detention.
The Committee recommended that Luxembourg refrain from placing minors in adult prisons for disciplinary purposes; and that solitary confinement be strictly and specifically regulated by law and that judicial supervision of the practice should be strengthened so that the punishment was applied only in severe circumstances, and with a view to its abolition, particularly during pre-trial detention.
Among positive aspects of the report of Saudi Arabia, the Committee noted newly promulgated Codes of Civil Procedure, Criminal Procedure and Practice for Lawyers; and the competence of a Board of Grievances to hear allegations of violations of human rights.
Concern was cited, among other things, that there were allegations of prolonged pre-trial detention of some individuals which heightened the risk of torture and could on occasion of itself be a violation of the Convention; that there were reports of incommunicado detention, at times for extended periods, particularly during pre-trial investigations; that regulations for investigating officers to ascertain "by judicious means" reasons for an individual's silence could risk acts in violation of the Convention; and that cases of deportation of foreigners had been drawn to the Committee's attention that seemed to have been in breach of the Convention.
The Committee recommended, among other things, that Saudi Arabia re-examine the imposition by judicial and administrative authorities of corporal punishments, in particular flogging and amputation, that were not in conformity with the Convention; that it expressly incorporate within its domestic law a crime of torture; that it ensure that its laws were in practice applied equally regardless of nationality, gender, religious affiliation or other distinctions; that persons who might be responsible for violations of the Convention be subject to prompt and impartial investigation; and that Mutawe'en -- or religious -- officials exercise a clear and precise jurisdiction in conformity with the Convention and other applicable rules of non-discrimination.
The Committee cited among positive developments in the Russian Federation the introduction of a new Criminal Code and a new Code of Criminal Procedure and the transfer of the penal correction system from the authority of the Ministry of the Interior to the authority of the Ministry of Justice.
The Committee acknowledged as a factor impeding implementation of the Convention the difficulties faced by the Russian Federation in overcoming the inheritance of a system characterized by "arbitrariness and impunity", but noted that under the Convention no exceptional circumstances could justify torture.
Concern was expressed, among other things, over numerous and consistent allegations of widespread torture and other cruel treatment of detainees committed by law-enforcement personnel, commonly with a view to obtaining confessions; a persistent pattern of impunity for torture and other ill-treatment enjoyed both by civil and military officials; distressing conditions of pre-trial detention; and reports of conditions amounting to inhuman treatment of children in institutions or places of detention. Regarding events in Chechnya, the Committee noted concern over numerous, ongoing reports of severe violations of human rights and the Convention, including arbitrary detention, torture and ill-treatment, forced confessions, extrajudicial killings, and forced disappearances.
The Committee recommended, among other things, that the Russian Federation promptly incorporate into domestic law a precise definition of and specific crime of torture; that it ensure absolute respect for the principle of inadmissibility of evidence obtained by torture and review cases of convictions based solely on confessions, recognizing that many of these might have been obtained through ill-treatment; that it improve conditions in prisons and pre-trial detention centres; that it ensure prompt, impartial and full investigations into the many allegations of torture reported to the authorities; that it distribute and ensure implementation of appropriate instructions on the prohibition of ill-treatment of children in institutions and prisons; and that it ensure that no person was expelled, returned or extradited to a country where there were substantial grounds to believe he would be in danger of being subjected to torture. Regarding the situation in Chechnya, the Committee recommended among other things that the Russian Federation establish a credible, impartial and independent committee to investigate allegations of breaches of the Convention by the military forces of the Russian Federation and the Chechen separatists; and that it take steps to ensure civilian control over the army and ensure that hazing, torture and ill-treatment were prohibited in the military.

Background on Convention and Committee
The Convention, adopted unanimously by the General Assembly in 1984, entered into force on 26 June 1987. States parties to the Convention are required to outlaw torture and are explicitly prohibited from using "higher orders" or "exceptional circumstances" as excuses for acts of torture. The Convention introduced two significant new elements to the United Nations fight against torture. First, it specifies that alleged torturers may be tried in any State party or they may be extradited to face trial in the State party where their crimes were committed. Second, under article 20, it provides for investigation of reliable reports of torture, including visits to the State party concerned, with its agreement, if the Committee receives reliable information which appears to contain well-founded indications that torture is being systematically practiced in the territory of a State party.
Under article 21, a State party to the Convention may at any time declare that it recognizes the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State party claims that another State party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Convention.
Under article 22, a State party to the Convention may at any time declare that it recognizes the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications from, or on behalf of, individuals subject to its jurisdiction who claim to be victims of a violation by a State party of the provisions of the Convention.
The Convention has been ratified or acceded to by the following 129 States: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Fasso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Yemen, Yugoslavia and Zambia.
The following 46 States have recognized the competence of the Committee under articles 21 and 22: Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Canada, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, France, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Senegal, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uruguay, Venezuela and Yugoslavia. In addition, Japan, Uganda, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America have recognized the competence of the Committee under article 21 only. Azerbaijan, Mexico and Seychelles have recognized the competence of the Committee under article 22 only.
The Commission on Human Rights, at its fifty-seventh session, invited States parties to the Convention to make the declarations under articles 21 and 22. It also invited parties to envisage withdrawing their reservations to article 20.

Other United Nations Activities Against Torture
In addition to preventive measures, the United Nations has taken action to come to the aid of torture victims. In 1981 the General Assembly set up the United Nations Voluntary Trust Fund for Victims of Torture. At its fifty-seventh session, the Commission on Human Rights on 24 April, 2001 appealed to all Governments, organizations and individuals in a position to do so to contribute to the Fund in order to allow it to respond to the constantly increasing number of requests for assistance. On 25 April 2001, the Commission extended the mandate of its Special Rapporteur on Torture for three years, encouraging all Governments to envisage inviting him to visit their countries.
The Commission on Human Rights also adopted at its 2002 session a draft optional protocol to the Convention against Torture to establish a system of inspection visits to places of detention. The draft protocol must still be approved by the Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly.

Membership and Officers
The Committee's members are elected by the States parties to the Convention and serve in their personal capacity. The current members of the Committee are: Peter Thomas Burns (Canada); Guibril Camara (Senegal); Sayed Kassem el Masry (Egypt); Felice Gaer (the United States of America); Alejandro Gonzalez Poblete (Chile); Andreas Mavrommatis (Cyprus); Fernando Marino Menendez (Spain); Ole Vedel Rasmussen (Denmark); Alexander M. Yakovlev (the Russian Federation); and Yu Mengjia (China).
Mr. Burns is Chairman. Vice-Chairpersons are Mr. Camara, Mr. Gonzalez Poblete and Mr. Yu. Mr. el Masry is Rapporteur.



* *** *