COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE CONCLUDES TWENTY-FIRST SESSION

ROUND-UP RELEASE
HR/CAT/98/43
20 November 1998




Considered Reports of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia,
Iceland, Croatia, the United Kingdom, Hungary and Tunisia


The Committee against Torture concluded this afternoon its twenty-first session following two-weeks of meetings at the Palais des Nations and issued its conclusions and recommendations on the report of Tunisia which it examined on 18 November.

During the course of the session, the Committee considered reports and recommended measures to prevent ill-treatment of detainees or prisoners in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Iceland, Croatia, the United Kingdom, Hungary and Tunisia. The six countries submitted their reports and sent Government delegations to appear before the Committee's 10 independent experts to answer questions in keeping with their obligations as States parties to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. One hundred and five countries have ratified the Convention.

In addition to reviewing country reports in public session, the Committee also considered in a series of private meetings communications from individuals claiming to be victims of violations by States parties of the provisions of the Convention. Information on decisions taken on these allegations will be released later. Such communications are accepted only if they concern the 39 countries which have declared the Committee competent to receive the complaints under article 22 of the Convention.

Also during the session, Mary Robinson, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, informed the Committee that the contributions to the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture were constantly increasing. The amount available to the Fund had reached approximately $ 5 million. Efforts to obtain contributions should nevertheless continue since an amount of $ 6.8 million had been requested for the Fund’s rehabilitation projects in 1998. Mrs. Robinson said she strongly supported the creation of an international preventive system of regular visits to detention places.

The Committee's next session is scheduled for 26 April to 14 May 1999. It is expected to consider reports of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Mauritius, Bulgaria, Venezuela, Italy, Luxembourg, Libyan Arab Republic, Morocco, Liechtenstein and Egypt.

Conclusions and Recommendations on Country Reports

Cited among positive developments in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia were the provisions of the Constitution which forbade all violence against a person deprived of liberty and any extortion of a confession or statement. Regarding the factors and difficulties impeding the application of the provisions of the Convention, the Committee took into account the situation in which the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia currently found itself, especially with respect to the unrest and ethnic friction in the province of Kosovo. However, the Committee emphasized that no exceptional circumstances could ever provide justification for failure to comply with the terms of the Convention.

The Committee recommended that the State party fulfil the legal, political and moral obligations it undertook when it ratified the Convention. It recommended the verbatim incorporation of the crime of torture into the Yugoslav criminal codes. In order to diminish the recurrence of torture in that country, the Committee recommended that the State party legally and practically ensure the independence of the judiciary, the unrestricted access to counsel immediately after arrest, shortening of the length of police custody to a maximum period of 48 hours, shortening of the length of pre-trial post-indictment detention, strict exclusion of all evidence directly or indirectly derived from torture, effective civil redress and a vigorous criminal prosecution in all cases of torture.

The Committee cited among positive developments in Iceland: its declarations which were necessary to recognize the Committee's competence under article 21 and 22 of the Convention; the amendments to the Constitution adopted in 1995 that were aimed at enhancing protection of human rights and establish, in particular, the absolute prohibition of torture; and enactment by the Icelandic authorities of legislation and rules on the rights of arrested persons, interrogations by the police, and the protection of persons committed to psychiatric hospitals against their will.

Concern was expressed, among other things, about the fact that torture was not considered as a specific crime in the penal legislation of the State party; and about the use of solitary confinement, particularly as a preventive measure during pre-trial detention. The Committee recommended that torture as a specific crime be included in the penal legislation of Iceland; that Icelandic authorities review the provisions regulating solitary confinement during pre-trial detention in order to reduce considerably the cases to which solitary confinement could be applicable; that legislation concerning evidence to be adduced in judicial proceedings be brought in line with the provisions of article 15 of the Convention so as to explicitly exclude any evidence made as a result of torture; and that information on constraining measures applied in psychiatric hospitals be included in Iceland's next periodic report.

Among positive aspects of the report of Croatia, the Committee said the Government had incorporated in its domestic legislation the crime of torture and other acts of ill-treatment, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. It praised certain changes which were introduced in the rules of criminal procedures, particularly the obligation to present detainees before a judge within 24 hours.

Noted as a cause for concern was a law of amnesty adopted in 1996 which was applicable to many cases which qualified as acts of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in the spirit of the Convention. The Committee was seriously concerned about certain allegations of ill-treatment and torture, sometimes leading to death, which were attributed to agents of security forces and particularly to the police. The Committee recommended, as it did during its consideration of the initial report, that the State party deploy all necessary efforts so that the competent authorities immediately proceeded to an impartial, appropriate and effective investigation each time they were confronted with allegations of grave violations submitted by credible non-governmental organizations. It also recommended that the State party, through the competent authorities, take into consideration the elements of information which were transmitted to it by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and certain non-governmental organizations concerning human rights violations, particularly cases of torture as well as cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. The Committee further recommended that complaints relating to constitutional matters be directly received by the Constitutional Court in all cases of allegations of torture and other punishment or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

The Committee said that among the positive aspects of the situation in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland were the enactment of the Human Rights Act in 1998; the enactment of the Immigration Commission Act in 1998; the "Peace Process" in Northern Ireland, pursuant to the Good Friday Agreement; and the removal of corporal punishment as a penalty in several of the dependent territories.

The Committee expressed concern about the number of deaths in police custody and the apparent failure of the State party to provide an effective investigative mechanism to deal with allegations of police and prison authorities' abuse. It recommended the closure of detention centres, particularly Castlereagh, at the earliest opportunity; the reform of the State Immunity Act of 1987 to ensure that its provisions conformed to the obligations contained in the Convention; and the abolition of the use of plastic bullet rounds as a means of riot control. It also recommended the reconstruction of the Royal Ulster Constabulary so that it more closely represented the cultural realities of Northern Ireland. It also recommended that in the case of Senator Pinochet of Chile, that the matter be referred to the office of the public prosecutor, with a view to examining the feasibility of and if appropriate initiating criminal proceedings in England, in the event that the decision was made not to extradite him. That would satisfy the State party's obligations under articles 4 and 7 of the Convention and article 27 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969.

The Committee listed among positive aspects of the report of Hungary the withdrawal earlier this year of its reservation on geographical limitation to the 1951 Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, that previously excluded non-European asylum-seekers; the new legislation on asylum; and the Ombudsman mechanism.

Concern was expressed, among other things, about the fact that the provisions of the Criminal Code of Hungary made torture punishable only if the soldier or policeman committing the act was aware that by doing so he or she was committing a criminal offence. The Committee was also concerned about the persistent reports that an inordinately high proportion of detainees were roughly handled or treated cruelly before, during and after interrogation by the police and that a disproportionate number of detainees and/or prisoners serving their sentence were Roma. Among its recommendations, the Committee urged Hungary to take all necessary measures, including in particular, prompt access to defence counsel assistance soon after arrest, and improved training to prevent and eradicate torture and all acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The Committee requested that Hungary should include in its next report all relevant statistics, data and information on the number of complaints about ill- treatment, the proportion they represented in relation to the total number of cases investigated and, in particular, the proportion of Roma complaints, detainees and prisoners.

Among the positive aspects of the report of Tunisia, the Committee said measures were taken by the authorities to build a legal and constitutional framework for the promotion and protection of human rights. It welcomed the establishment of a number of human rights posts, offices and units within the executive branch and within the civil society. it also noted the publishing of a code of conduct for law-enforcement officials, the setting up of human rights departments in Tunisian universities and the establishment of human rights units in some key Ministries.

Concern was expressed about the fact that the definition of torture under Tunisian law was not in conformity with the provisions of the Convention; and that a wide gap existed between law and practice with regard to the protection of human rights. The Committee was disturbed by the reported widespread practice of torture and other cruel and degrading treatment perpetrated by security forces and the police that in certain cases resulted in death in custody; and by pressure and intimidation used by officials to prevent the victims from lodging complaints. The Committee was concerned that many of the regulations existing in Tunisia for arrested persons were not adhered to in practice and that arrests were very often made by plain clothes agents who refused to show any identification or warrant.

Furthermore, the Committee was particularly disturbed by the abuses directed against female members of the families of detainees and exiled persons. It had been reported that dozens of women were subjected to violence and sexual abuse or threats in order to put pressure on or to punish their imprisoned or exiled relatives. The Committee felt that by constantly denying those allegations, the authorities were in fact granting those responsible for torture immunity from punishment, thus encouraging the continuation of those abhorrent practices.

As part of its recommendations, the Committee called upon Tunisia to put an end to the degrading practice of torture and to eliminate the gap between the law and its implementation, and in particular, to take up measures to ensure strict enforcement of the provisions of law and procedures of arrest and police custody; to strictly enforce the procedure of registration, including notification of families of persons taken into custody; to ensure the right of victims of torture to lodge a complaint without the fear of being subjected to any kind of reprisal; to ensure that medical examinations were automatically provided following allegations of abuse and that an autopsy was performed following a death in custody; to reduce the police custody period to a maximum of 48 hours; and to amend the relevant legislation to ensure that no evidence obtained through torture should be invoked as evidence in any proceedings, among other things.

After the Committee issued its conclusions and recommendations on the report of Tunisia, the Permanent Representative of Tunisia to the United Nations Office at Geneva, Kamel Morjane, said he was surprised and astonished that the remarks and recommendations did not reflect the dialogue engaged between his delegation and the members of the Committee. He said the Committee only shed light on the negative aspects of the situation without mentioning any positive changes in Tunisian legislation. Nevertheless, he said, he would bring those comments to the attention of the Government of Tunisia.

States Parties to Convention

With the accession of Bahrain, there are now 105 States parties to the Convention against Torture, which requires signatories to outlaw torture and explicitly prohibits the use of "higher orders" or "exceptional circumstances" as excuses for acts of torture.

Under article 20 of the Convention, if the Committee receives reliable information which appears to contain well-founded indications that torture is being systematically practised in the territory of a State party, the Committee shall invite that State party to cooperate in the examination of this information.

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.

Following is the list of States parties: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Belarus, Belize, Benin, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, 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, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Morocco, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela and Yemen.

The following 39 States have recognized the competence of the Committee under articles 21 and 22: Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Finland, France, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Senegal, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uruguay and Venezuela. In addition, the United Kingdom and the United States have recognized the competence of the Committee under article 21 only.

Membership and Officers

The Committee was established in 1987 to monitor compliance with the Convention and to assist States parties in implementing its provisions. Its 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); Alejandro Gonzalez Poblete (Chile); Sayed Kassem el Masry (Egypt); Andreas V. Mavrommatis (Cyprus); Antonio Silva Henriques Gaspar (Portugal); Bent Sorensen (Denmark); Alexander M. Yakovlev (Russian Federation); Yu Mengja (China), and Bostjan M. Zuapancic (Slovenia).

At the opening of the twentieth session, Mr. Burns was elected Chairman of the Committee. Chosen as Vice-Chairpersons were Mr. Camara (Senegal), Mr. Gonzalez Poblete (Chile) and Mr. Zupancic (Slovenia). Mr. Sorensen (Denmark) was elected Rapporteur.