COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE CONTINUES REVIEW OF REPORT OF ESTONIA

CAT
29th session
15 November 2002
Afternoon



The Committee against Torture continued review this afternoon of an initial report of Estonia, hearing a Government delegation contend, in the course of replying to questions put yesterday by the Committee, that the Ministry of Justice had received no complaints this year of abuse of prisoners by prison officers, and that while there was no precise definition of torture in the Estonian Penal Code, the Code nonetheless prohibited acts amounting to torture.
Marina Kaljurand, Deputy Under-Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, responding to questions put by Committee members on Thursday, told the Committee among other things that three “cases” of acts of violence, including torture, were defined in the Code so that impunity for committing acts in violation of the Convention against Torture was not possible. The Convention, to which Estonia is a State party, provides in its first article a definition of torture that is to be incorporated into the legal regimes of States that ratify the treaty.
In 2000, 51 persons -- not only public officials -- had been convicted of acts of violence, and two persons of acts of torture, the delegation said, and in 2001, 24 cases had been registered for acts of violence and seven for acts of torture.
Several new bodies had been established to increase democracy and independence of the judiciary, such as a Full Court, a Judges' Assembly and a Court Administration Advisory Council, the Estonian delegation reported.
The Committee’s formal conclusions and recommendations on the report of Estonia will be issued at 3 p.m. Thursday, 21 November.
Estonia, as one of the 131 States parties to the Convention against Torture, is required to submit periodic reports on efforts to put the Convention’s provisions into effect.
The Committee will reconvene at 10 a.m. Monday, 18 November, to begin review of a second periodic report of Venezuela.

Discussion
MARINA KALJURAND, Deputy Under-Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, replying to questions asked by Committee members upon presentation of Estonia’s report Thursday, said among other things that all international agreements ratified by Estonia prevailed over domestic law. Norms of customary international law were considered part of Estonian law and could by applied in court.
As universal jurisdiction was provided in the Penal Code, Estonian penal law was applied to any act committed outside the country condemned by an international agreement binding on Estonia. So far, six persons had been convicted of crimes against humanity, five of them were connected with illegal deportation. One was a Soviet agent. At the moment, ten cases charging crimes against humanity were before Estonian courts, Ms Kaljurand said.
The Estonian Code of Criminal Procedure provided that the refusal of extradition could only be decided by the Government on the grounds of relevant international treaties, such as the Convention against Torture. Last year, 23 requests for extradition had been submitted, 12 of which involved Estonian nationals. Estonia had so far never refused extradition of persons, said Ms Kaljurand.
According to Article 21 of the Constitution, everyone who was deprived of his liberty had to be informed promptly, in a language and manner which he understood, of his rights and of the reasons. A person suspected of a criminal offence also had to be given the opportunity to choose counsel, and to notify those closest to him. No one could be detained for more than 48 hours without the specific authorization of a court, the Estonian delegation said.
A person could be detained as a suspect if he was apprehended during the commission of a criminal offence or directly thereafter, if he was an eyewitness to a criminal offence, if the victim indicated such person as the author or a criminal offence, or if the evidentiary traces of the offence indicated that he was the author. A detained suspect had the right to file a complaint against the activities of a preliminary investigator, and had to be interrogated no later than 24 hours after arrest.
In order to prevent the commission of a new criminal offence by a suspect, he could be taken into custody. A person could not be held in custody for longer than six months for the investigation of any specific criminal matter. In the case of particularly complex or serious a crimes, the Chief Public Prosecutor or senior county or city prosecutor could request an exceptional extension of detention for up to one year.
New bodies had been established to increase democracy and independence of the judiciary, such as the Full Court, the Judges' Assembly and the Court Administration Advisory Council, the delegation said. The main guarantee of the independence of judges was their appointment for life and the fact that they could only be removed from office by a court judgement. Criminal proceedings could be initiated against a judge only upon the consent of the Supreme Court plenary.
The delegation said the definition of torture as provided in the first article of the Convention had not been directly incorporated into the Estonian Penal Code. Nevertheless, three cases of acts of violence, including torture, were provided for in the Code, so impunity was not possible. In 2000, 51 persons -- not only public officials -- had been convicted of acts of violence, and two persons of acts of torture. In 2001, 24 cases had been registered for acts of violence and seven for acts of torture.
The State Emergency Act provided that restrictions to someone’s rights and freedoms could not involve torture, cruel or degrading treatment in time of war, said the delegation.
The low rate of naturalization, which had stabilized at 2 per cent of non-citizen residents per year (3,000 to 4,000 persons) could be partly explained by the relatively limited motivation of non-citizens to take the necessary exams, the delegation said. The delegation assured the Committee that the State had created opportunities for those who wanted to apply for the Estonian citizenship to do so, but surveys indicated that people did not feel the need for it, as main socio-economic rights were guaranteed to everyone on Estonian territory without distinction.
Asylum seekers and refugees were ensured the same rights and freedoms as the Estonian permanent residents, the delegation said. To aid with family reunification, a residence permit could be granted to the spouse of a refugee who was not an Estonian citizen. Estonia hosted four refugees who had received asylum under the Refugees Act, and seven who had received residency under the Alien’s Act, which provided residence if an expulsion would involved threat to the alien if he was expelled to his country of nationality or former residence. All refugees lived in a special Admissions Centre for Asylum Applicants, and aliens subject to expulsion were held in prison institutions.
The visits of NGOs were permitted and even encouraged by the prison administration, said the delegation.
Competition and Evaluation Committees evaluated police officers every three years, the delegation said. The records of prison officers were kept in the personnel department of the Ministry of Justice, which had the authority to impose disciplinary punishment for misconduct.
During interrogations and trials, juveniles were assisted by teachers or psychologists, said the delegation.
The Ministry of Justice had received no complaints from prisoners this year concerning physical abuse by prison officers, the delegation said. In some letters, prisoners had asked for information about criminal procedure, detention conditions, and about their rights. If there were sufficient grounds, the Minister of Justice could initiate proceedings against prison officers, such as the disciplinary measures that had been taken against the Director of the Tallinn Prison for non-compliance with the prison system's Internal Rules.
The Legal Chancellor performed the functions of an Ombudsman in Estonia and could file petitions against the activities of officials of State agencies or local Governments upon violation of the Constitutional rights or freedoms of persons, the delegation said. Once a year this official presented to the Riigikogu (Parliament) both an oral and written overview of his activities. In 1999, 18 per cent of the overall amount of petitions and letters he received concerned rights of detainees, as compared to 27 per cent in 2000.
Crimes of violence formed a very small part of the overall offences committed by the defence forces, the delegation said. Most ocrimes were related to desertion.
Anyone whose rights had been violated by unlawful activities of a public authority could claim compensation for damage as well as for medical expenses, said the delegation.
Anonymity of witnesses was used in 15 to 20 criminal procedures per year, said the delegation. Estonian Courts considered that a conviction could not be based solely or to the great extent on the statement of an anonymous witness. Other evidence was necessary.
In 2001, the Ministry of Internal Affairs had carried out seminars on human rights issues for police officers, such as on domestic violence, the delegation said. In 1995, the Council of Europe Tallinn Information Office had been created at the National Library of Estonia to make available the organization’s documents and publications. The Information Office had published in Estonian various human rights reference books and collections.
In 2002, 1,324 prisoners held in Estonia were Estonian, and 1,710 were Russian, the delegation said. Several experts remarked on the disproportion between the number of Russian prisoners and their low representation in the population.



* *** *