Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Press releases Treaty bodies
COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE HEARS RESPONSE OF TOGO
11 May 2006
Share
11 May 2006
The Committee against Torture this afternoon heard the response of Togo to questions raised by Committee Experts on the initial to fifth periodic report of that country on how it is implementing the provisions of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
Responding to a series of questions raised by the Committee members on Wednesday, 10 May, the delegation, which was led by Massan Loretta Acouetey, Minister for Human Rights, Democracy and Reconciliation of Togo, said that, concerning the extradition by police to other police forces that took place outside of the context of any judiciary procedure, the practice was not sufficient to protect the person extradited. That practice was carried out in the context of quadripartite agreements that had been signed in 1984. The Togolese Constitution of 1992, in its Article 23, provided for persons to be extradited to appear before judicial bodies. As the Constitution ensured a greater human rights protection, it was the Constitutional provision that prevailed.
Concerning the right of detainees to medical care, Ms. Acouetey said that it was important to distinguish between the right to a medical exam during the period of initial detention and the right to medical care during the course of preventive detention or when serving sentence. In the first case, the person in remand or a member of his family had the right to ask for a medical exam to be undertaken. In the second case, the detainee did not have to ask to be treated. The authorities were obliged to provide medical care for those who were sick. It had to be recognized, however, that there were insufficient resources that the authorities had to contend with in both of these cases.
The Committee will submit its conclusions and recommendations on the reports of Togo towards the end of the session on Friday, 19 May 2006.
As one of the 141 States parties to the Convention against Torture, Togo is obliged to provide the Committee with periodic reports on the measures it has undertaken to fight torture.
When the Committee reconvenes at 10 a.m. on Friday, 12 May, it is scheduled to discuss the recommendations it will make to the Inter-Committee Meeting of the Human Rights Treaty Bodies and the meeting of Chairpersons of Human Rights Treaty Bodies.
Response of Togo
MASSAN LORETTA ACOUETEY, Minister for Human Rights, Democracy and Reconciliation, responding to a series of questions raised by the Committee Experts on Wednesday, 10 May, said that, regarding situations in which provisions of treaties were in contradiction with the Constitution, those provisions could not be applied unless there was a Constitutional amendment.
With regard to the need to define torture in domestic statutory law, Ms. Acouetey said that she had pointed out in her opening remarks that the National Commission for the Modernization of Legislation within the National Programme for the Modernization of Justice would incorporate the provisions of the Convention within their domestic law, in particular the definition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.
Concerning the extradition by police to other police forces that took place outside of the context of any judiciary procedure, she acknowledged that the practice was not sufficient to protect the person extradited. That practice was carried out in the context of quadripartite agreements that had been signed in 1984. The Togolese Constitution of 1992, in its Article 23, provided for persons to be extradited to appear before judicial bodies. As the Constitution ensured a greater human rights protection, it was the Constitutional provision that prevailed.
On the case of the former President of the Central African Republic, the delegation would provide the Committee with further information upon their return to Togo.
Regarding events surrounding the elections of April 2005, following those events the Government had established a special national investigatory commission to verify the facts, and establish who had been the instigators and the victims. That commission had submitted its report. In addition, the Government had received two international missions aimed at clarifying the facts: that of the United Nations and that of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights. The first had already submitted its report and the Government was awaiting the report of the latter.
Responding to queries on how long it would take for legislative reforms to be put in place, Ms. Acouetey said that the National Commission for the Modernization of Legislation was established on 5 May 2005. The revision of the statutory law was being undertaken with the assistance of Togo’s development partners and it would take two years.
Concerning the right of detainees to medical care, Ms. Acouetey said that it was important to distinguish between the right to a medical exam during the period of initial detention and the right to medical care during the course of preventive detention or when serving sentence. In the first case, the person in remand or a member of his family had the right to ask for a medical exam to be undertaken. In the second case, the detainee did not have to ask to be treated. The authorities were obliged to provide medical care for those that were sick. It had to be recognized, however, that there were insufficient resources that the authorities had to contend with in both of these cases.
On the topic of prolonged preventive detentions, the general rule, Ms. Acouetey said, was that laid down in articles 112 and 115 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1983. Under those articles a detention could not exceed 10 days for first offenders facing less than two year sentences, nor more than half the length of the maximum penalty for crimes that carried sentences of longer than 2 years.
Currently, under the 22 commitments undertaken by Togo with the European Union, there were no restrictions to visits to areas of detention. Any human rights non-governmental organization concerned with issues of detention could visit any such facility on request.
Concerning the continuation of certain customary practices in spite of laws to prohibit them, Ms. Acouetey said that certain degrading practices regarding widows were still carried out. It was for that reason that an interministerial committee to review and revise certain provisions of the Code of Individuals and Families was set up. In its conclusions, that committee recommended the suppression of those practices.
On the issue of the existence of pro-government militias, Ms. Acouetey said that the Government did not have militias, nor did it tolerate their existence. Nevertheless, it had to be recognized that political parties often relied on their members to ensure security for their leaders.
Regarding the freedom of human rights defenders, she said that the State guaranteed human rights NGOs and other human rights associations the free exercise of their activities throughout the territory. Such organizations were free to establish themselves and had access, upon demand, to detention facilities.
Concerning the alleged attack against the headquarters of the Togolese Human Rights League, Ms. Acouetey said that, in May 2005, the League had presented a report it had published. Following an argument involving certain participants regarding the methodology and contents of that report an altercation broke out. The League's headquarters had never been attacked by militia of any kind, she affirmed.
Concerning the journalists detained in 2003, Ms. Acouetey said that no sanctions whatsoever had been imposed on them.
Comments and Questions by Committee Experts
GUIBRIL CAMARA, the Committee Expert serving as Rapporteur for the reports of Togo, thanked the Minister and the members of her delegation for the efforts made to provide exhaustive and clear replies to the many questions the Committee had asked. He had no further clarifications to request from the delegation. The Committee would address any issues in the context of its concluding observations and recommendations that they would issue at the end of the session.
The Committee looked forward with great interest to the written replies to be supplied by the delegation.
FERNANDO MARIÑO MENENDEZ, the Committee Expert serving as Co-Rapporteur for the reports of Togo, said that, regarding non-governmental organizations (NGOs), human rights defenders were often NGOs, but one NGO he talked with had been a bit discouraged by the role assigned to them in helping to reform conditions in prisons and detention facilities. Were NGOs going to be allowed to visit such facilities as part of the Government's reform plans?
With regard to the use of confessions or declarations made under torture, there was a specific standard that had to be adhered to. Did Togolese law adhere to that standard, he wondered? The scope of the Togolese provision on the subject was unclear to him.
An Expert asked if NGOs had participated in the drafting of the report.
The Chairman said that, regarding the case in which a female suspect had remained in custody for years, without a remand from a court of law, he wanted to know how that could happen and who had been held responsible.
Response by Delegation
Responding briefly, the delegation said that it was true that currently there were no provisions in the legal code so that any confession obtained under torture would be null and void, but in the new legal code that would be specifically prohibited. In addition, there were other provisions in the law that at least partially covered the situation. For example, if a judge suspected that a confession had been obtained under torture he was obliged to call for an investigation.
With regard to the woman who had been held in detention for such a long period of time, the delegation said that they would provide details after looking into the facts of the case.
NGOs had participated in the drafting of the report, the delegation said. Notably, information had been provided by the Togolese Human Rights League, and the delegation was very grateful for that support.
Ms. Acouetey wanted once again to bring up the question of the events of 2005 and the investigation into that affair. The President was committed to finding out who was responsible for those acts and holding the perpetrators responsible. There would be no impunity. There were several investigations that had been made and were being carried out currently on those events. But there had to be decisions made within the framework of a national political dialogue. It was only then that the custom of impunity would finally be rejected by the Togolese.
In concluding remarks, the Chairman stressed to the delegation that they had to provide written replies to questions that remained unanswered. He was sure that the proposal by the High Commissioner for Human Rights to set up an office in Togo, which had been accepted by the Government, would help improve the human rights situation in the country.
* *** *
For use of the information media; not an official record
The Committee against Torture this afternoon heard the response of Togo to questions raised by Committee Experts on the initial to fifth periodic report of that country on how it is implementing the provisions of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
Responding to a series of questions raised by the Committee members on Wednesday, 10 May, the delegation, which was led by Massan Loretta Acouetey, Minister for Human Rights, Democracy and Reconciliation of Togo, said that, concerning the extradition by police to other police forces that took place outside of the context of any judiciary procedure, the practice was not sufficient to protect the person extradited. That practice was carried out in the context of quadripartite agreements that had been signed in 1984. The Togolese Constitution of 1992, in its Article 23, provided for persons to be extradited to appear before judicial bodies. As the Constitution ensured a greater human rights protection, it was the Constitutional provision that prevailed.
Concerning the right of detainees to medical care, Ms. Acouetey said that it was important to distinguish between the right to a medical exam during the period of initial detention and the right to medical care during the course of preventive detention or when serving sentence. In the first case, the person in remand or a member of his family had the right to ask for a medical exam to be undertaken. In the second case, the detainee did not have to ask to be treated. The authorities were obliged to provide medical care for those who were sick. It had to be recognized, however, that there were insufficient resources that the authorities had to contend with in both of these cases.
The Committee will submit its conclusions and recommendations on the reports of Togo towards the end of the session on Friday, 19 May 2006.
As one of the 141 States parties to the Convention against Torture, Togo is obliged to provide the Committee with periodic reports on the measures it has undertaken to fight torture.
When the Committee reconvenes at 10 a.m. on Friday, 12 May, it is scheduled to discuss the recommendations it will make to the Inter-Committee Meeting of the Human Rights Treaty Bodies and the meeting of Chairpersons of Human Rights Treaty Bodies.
Response of Togo
MASSAN LORETTA ACOUETEY, Minister for Human Rights, Democracy and Reconciliation, responding to a series of questions raised by the Committee Experts on Wednesday, 10 May, said that, regarding situations in which provisions of treaties were in contradiction with the Constitution, those provisions could not be applied unless there was a Constitutional amendment.
With regard to the need to define torture in domestic statutory law, Ms. Acouetey said that she had pointed out in her opening remarks that the National Commission for the Modernization of Legislation within the National Programme for the Modernization of Justice would incorporate the provisions of the Convention within their domestic law, in particular the definition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.
Concerning the extradition by police to other police forces that took place outside of the context of any judiciary procedure, she acknowledged that the practice was not sufficient to protect the person extradited. That practice was carried out in the context of quadripartite agreements that had been signed in 1984. The Togolese Constitution of 1992, in its Article 23, provided for persons to be extradited to appear before judicial bodies. As the Constitution ensured a greater human rights protection, it was the Constitutional provision that prevailed.
On the case of the former President of the Central African Republic, the delegation would provide the Committee with further information upon their return to Togo.
Regarding events surrounding the elections of April 2005, following those events the Government had established a special national investigatory commission to verify the facts, and establish who had been the instigators and the victims. That commission had submitted its report. In addition, the Government had received two international missions aimed at clarifying the facts: that of the United Nations and that of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights. The first had already submitted its report and the Government was awaiting the report of the latter.
Responding to queries on how long it would take for legislative reforms to be put in place, Ms. Acouetey said that the National Commission for the Modernization of Legislation was established on 5 May 2005. The revision of the statutory law was being undertaken with the assistance of Togo’s development partners and it would take two years.
Concerning the right of detainees to medical care, Ms. Acouetey said that it was important to distinguish between the right to a medical exam during the period of initial detention and the right to medical care during the course of preventive detention or when serving sentence. In the first case, the person in remand or a member of his family had the right to ask for a medical exam to be undertaken. In the second case, the detainee did not have to ask to be treated. The authorities were obliged to provide medical care for those that were sick. It had to be recognized, however, that there were insufficient resources that the authorities had to contend with in both of these cases.
On the topic of prolonged preventive detentions, the general rule, Ms. Acouetey said, was that laid down in articles 112 and 115 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1983. Under those articles a detention could not exceed 10 days for first offenders facing less than two year sentences, nor more than half the length of the maximum penalty for crimes that carried sentences of longer than 2 years.
Currently, under the 22 commitments undertaken by Togo with the European Union, there were no restrictions to visits to areas of detention. Any human rights non-governmental organization concerned with issues of detention could visit any such facility on request.
Concerning the continuation of certain customary practices in spite of laws to prohibit them, Ms. Acouetey said that certain degrading practices regarding widows were still carried out. It was for that reason that an interministerial committee to review and revise certain provisions of the Code of Individuals and Families was set up. In its conclusions, that committee recommended the suppression of those practices.
On the issue of the existence of pro-government militias, Ms. Acouetey said that the Government did not have militias, nor did it tolerate their existence. Nevertheless, it had to be recognized that political parties often relied on their members to ensure security for their leaders.
Regarding the freedom of human rights defenders, she said that the State guaranteed human rights NGOs and other human rights associations the free exercise of their activities throughout the territory. Such organizations were free to establish themselves and had access, upon demand, to detention facilities.
Concerning the alleged attack against the headquarters of the Togolese Human Rights League, Ms. Acouetey said that, in May 2005, the League had presented a report it had published. Following an argument involving certain participants regarding the methodology and contents of that report an altercation broke out. The League's headquarters had never been attacked by militia of any kind, she affirmed.
Concerning the journalists detained in 2003, Ms. Acouetey said that no sanctions whatsoever had been imposed on them.
Comments and Questions by Committee Experts
GUIBRIL CAMARA, the Committee Expert serving as Rapporteur for the reports of Togo, thanked the Minister and the members of her delegation for the efforts made to provide exhaustive and clear replies to the many questions the Committee had asked. He had no further clarifications to request from the delegation. The Committee would address any issues in the context of its concluding observations and recommendations that they would issue at the end of the session.
The Committee looked forward with great interest to the written replies to be supplied by the delegation.
FERNANDO MARIÑO MENENDEZ, the Committee Expert serving as Co-Rapporteur for the reports of Togo, said that, regarding non-governmental organizations (NGOs), human rights defenders were often NGOs, but one NGO he talked with had been a bit discouraged by the role assigned to them in helping to reform conditions in prisons and detention facilities. Were NGOs going to be allowed to visit such facilities as part of the Government's reform plans?
With regard to the use of confessions or declarations made under torture, there was a specific standard that had to be adhered to. Did Togolese law adhere to that standard, he wondered? The scope of the Togolese provision on the subject was unclear to him.
An Expert asked if NGOs had participated in the drafting of the report.
The Chairman said that, regarding the case in which a female suspect had remained in custody for years, without a remand from a court of law, he wanted to know how that could happen and who had been held responsible.
Response by Delegation
Responding briefly, the delegation said that it was true that currently there were no provisions in the legal code so that any confession obtained under torture would be null and void, but in the new legal code that would be specifically prohibited. In addition, there were other provisions in the law that at least partially covered the situation. For example, if a judge suspected that a confession had been obtained under torture he was obliged to call for an investigation.
With regard to the woman who had been held in detention for such a long period of time, the delegation said that they would provide details after looking into the facts of the case.
NGOs had participated in the drafting of the report, the delegation said. Notably, information had been provided by the Togolese Human Rights League, and the delegation was very grateful for that support.
Ms. Acouetey wanted once again to bring up the question of the events of 2005 and the investigation into that affair. The President was committed to finding out who was responsible for those acts and holding the perpetrators responsible. There would be no impunity. There were several investigations that had been made and were being carried out currently on those events. But there had to be decisions made within the framework of a national political dialogue. It was only then that the custom of impunity would finally be rejected by the Togolese.
In concluding remarks, the Chairman stressed to the delegation that they had to provide written replies to questions that remained unanswered. He was sure that the proposal by the High Commissioner for Human Rights to set up an office in Togo, which had been accepted by the Government, would help improve the human rights situation in the country.
* *** *
For use of the information media; not an official record