COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE CONSIDERS REPORT OF SLOVAKIA ON COMPLIANCE WITH PROVISIONS OF CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE

CAT
26th session
4 May 2001
Morning





Roma People are Reportedly Persecuted by
Law Enforcement Officials, Experts Say


The Committee against Torture this morning started its examination of an initial report of Slovakia on how that country was giving effect to the provisions of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

Introducing his country's report, Kalman Petocz, Permanent Representative of Slovakia to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said his country had adopted effective legislative, administrative, judicial and other measures to prevent acts of torture in the whole territory under its jurisdiction. The Government was constantly questing for legal ways to improve the effectiveness and to deepen the protection of human rights in that area with the objective of ensuring the best enforcement of the Convention, he said.

Mr. Petocz further said that new draft laws had been adopted and prepared to achieve that goal; the Constitution stipulated that no person should be subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; and that provision was reflected in the whole legal order of the country.

Felice Gaer, the Committee member who served as rapporteur to the report of Slovakia, said that information received by the Committee spoke about acts of torture against Roma people at the hands of the law enforcement officials. The authorities had failed to carry out prompt, impartial and thorough investigations into allegations of such actions by police or skinheads. In addition, police had failed to protect Roma from violence perpetrated by skinheads.

Ms. Gaer also indicated the use of excessive force by police during investigations to extort confessions from suspects; and the phenomenon of "self-inflicted" wounds by detainees particularly concerned Roma detainees in police stations.


Other Committee members, including Yu Mengja, who served as co-rapporteur to the report of Slovakia, also queried the delegation on a number of issues, including minorities; the definition of torture; the status of the Convention within domestic legislation; and the handling of asylum-seekers, among other things.

The Slovak delegation includes Barbara Illkova, Advisor and Deputy Permanent Representative of Slovakia to the United Nations Office at Geneva; Peter Prochacka, Director of the Department of Human Rights in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Anton Fabry, Director General of the Corps of Prison and Court Guards; and Pavol Slopovsky, Director of the Office of International Police Cooperation.

Also, Josef Szabo, Deputy Director of the Department of International Relations, Office of the Prosecutor General of the Republic; Zuzana Stofova, of the International Law and European Integration Section, Ministry of Justice; and Eugen Nagy, of the Operational Activities Section of the Ministry of Health.

The members of the Slovak delegation will return to the Committee at 3.30 p.m. on Monday 7 May to provide their response to the questions raised today by Committee members.

Slovakia is among the 123 States parties to the Convention against Torture and as such it must submit periodic reports to the Committee highlighting the measures undertaken by the Government to implement the provisions of the Convention. It must also send a delegation to present the report and to answer questions put by the Committee's 10 experts.

When the Committee reconvenes at 3.m., it will hear the response of Bolivia to questions raised on the initial report of that country which was introduced yesterday morning.


Initial Report of Slovakia

The report (document CAT/C/24/Add.6) enumerates legislative, judicial and administrative measures undertaken by the State to implement individual articles of the Convention. It says that the Slovak Republic was founded on 1 January 1993 as a result of the split of Czechoslovakia. In Slovakia, torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment are considered one of the most severe violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Fundamental rights and freedoms are inalienable, imprescriptible and irrevocable, and they reflect the principles applied in the field of human rights on an international basis.

The report says that justice in Slovakia is administered by impartial and independent courts; judges are independent in their decision-making and they are bound only by the domestic law or international treaty; and the court system in the country is composed of the Supreme Court and other courts. The Slovak law says that any person, who in the wartime violated the rules of international law by inhuman treatment of helpless civilian populations, refugees, wounded persons, or members of the armed forces who have laid down their arms, shall be liable to a term of imprisonment of 3 to 10 years.

According to the report, the police should not allow any unreasonable detriment to be caused to any person in the context of his work and any necessary interference with his rights and freedoms should not exceed the scope necessary to achieve the purpose of his official activity. A policeman on duty is obliged to act within the law when a crime or misdemeanour is committed or when there is justified suspicion of its being committed. The policeman decides on the use of the particular coercive means according to the actual situation. The application and intensity of use, however, must always correspond to the circumstances and they can be used only in cases defined by law.

The report says that any person, who forces another person by violence, threat of violence or threat of other serious harm to do anything, omit doing or to endure anything being done, shall be liable to a term of imprisonment up to three years. Under the code of criminal procedure, only a person against whom charges were lodged may be placed in custody detention. Custody in pre-trial proceedings and in proceedings before a court shall not exceed two years. The police that made the arrest of the accused have to bring the accused without delay, not later than within 24 hours, before the court whose judge issued the warrant. If that does not happen, the accused must be released.


Introduction of Slovak Report

KALMAN PETOCZ, Permanent Representative of Slovakia to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said that his country had inter-linked legislative and institutional mechanisms ensuring observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms in place. The Constitution of Slovakia guaranteed fundamental rights and freedoms, which were inalienable and perpetual. Under the Constitution, torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment was considered as one of the most severe violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

Slovakia had adopted effective legislative, administrative, judicial and other measures to prevent acts of torture in the whole territory under its jurisdiction, Mr. Petocz said. The Government was constantly questing for legal ways to improve the effectiveness and to deepen the protection of human rights in that area with the objective to ensure the best enforcement of the Convention. In addition, new draft laws had been adopted and prepared to achieve that goal. The Constitution stipulated that no person should be subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. That provision was reflected in the whole legal order of the country.

The law on the status of refugees had been amended and had come into effect on 1 November 2000, Mr. Petocz went on to say. The most important point of the amendment was abolishing the 24-hour period necessary for admission into the asylum procedure, which had enabled unrestricted access to aliens. Another important aspect of the amendment was the establishment of a refugee's right to family reunion.

Mr. Petocz said that since 1998, the Ministry of the Interior had given courses called "transaction analysis -- regulation of interpersonal relations, conflict prevention and resolution, in particular between the policemen and citizens during police duty" under the guidance of lecturers for the Institute of Police Education in Zurich. Their objective was to train policemen in such a way that they acted in the spirit of the law when in contact with citizens. That also applied to the ban of torture and inappropriate behaviour by the police. In 2001, education had been included in the educational materials of the subject "ethnics and psychology of police work" at police academies.



Consideration of Report

FELICE GAER, Committee member and rapporteur to the report of Slovakia, asked the delegation to clarify the situation in which the judiciary was functioning independently. The fact that the judiciary authorities were housed in the same building as the executive might give rise to a doubt that they might not be fully independent.

The description of ill-treatment in the Slovak criminal code was more elaborate than the Convention. However, torture needed to be more specific in its definition to reflect article 1 of the Convention.

An agreement on cooperation had been signed between the Inspection Service Office of the Police and the General Directorate of the Corps of Prison and Court Guards regarding issues concerning the reporting of injuries of accused and sentenced person in cases when those persons stated that the injuries were caused by members of the police. Were there cases which illustrated the agreement?

With regard to refoulement of a refugee, the report said that a refugee might not be expelled to a country where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political notion.

Ms. Gaer said there was a pattern of police raids against Roma people with unwarranted searches of their residences in the middle of the night. The police terrorized Roma by waking them up during the night accompanied with dogs. Abusive words were used against them in addition to physical beating and mistreatment. There were also allegations of hate crimes against Chinese diplomats, Peruvian students, African immigrants and others on the ground of race. The officials attributed the allegation to "skinheads". The delegation should provide clarification on the situation and the pattern of ill-treatment committed against Roma and foreigners.

Non-governmental organizations had reported on acts of torture against Roma people at the hands of the law enforcement officials. The authorities had failed to carry out prompt, impartial and thorough investigations into allegations of such actions by police or skinheads. In addition, police had failed to protect Roma from violence perpetrated by skinheads. Police had also failed to investigate hate crimes, and judges did not give sentences to such acts.

Excessive use of force by police during investigations had been used to extort confessions from suspects. "Self-inflicted" wounds by detainees, particularly Roma detainees emerged from police stations with such phenomenon.

The report had mentioned universal jurisdiction, but did not indicate any examples of its implementation in the Slovak Republic. It had said that culpability of some crimes was judged according to the legal order of the Slovak Republic also when such a crime was committed abroad by a foreign national or a stateless person who was not an inhabitant of the Republic.

The report was lacking information on the breakdown of the prison population and the origin of the prisoners, according to nationality. The number of female prisoners was not mentioned at all.

Slovakia had to establish a demographic breakdown of its population including the exact figures of minorities residing in the country. The minority population was believed to be 10 per cent of the whole population. The fact that the Slovak Government was resenting to establish figures of the Roma population was the source of the problem concerning that segment of the population.

YU MENGJA, Committee member and co-rapporteur to the report of Slovakia, wanted to know if the competent authorities proceeded to a prompt and impartial investigation, wherever there was a reasonable ground to believe that an act of torture had been committed in their territory. He asked if examples of such cases could be cited and brought to the attention of the Committee.

What would happen if an individual who perpetrated an act of torture and was sentenced to pay compensation did not have the financial capability? Did the State intervene to redress the damage caused against the victim?

There had been cases that some persons were kept in isolation, which was tantamount to torture. Could the delegation clarify the situation?

Other Committee members also raised a number of queries. Several Experts said the submission of the report was late by six years. Although the report lacked information on cases of torture and other treatment, the fact that the submission was delayed by six years might indicate the existence of problems of that nature. The Expert also queried the delegation on a number of issues, including minorities; the definition of torture; the status of the Convention within domestic legislation; and handling of asylum-seekers, among other things.



* *** *