COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE HOLDS DIALOGUE WITH SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON TORTURE

CAT
28th session
15 May 2002
Morning




The Committee against Torture met this morning with the Special Rapporteur on torture of the Commission on Human Rights, discussing coordination of work and steps that could enhance efforts to eradicate maltreatment.
The Special Rapporteur, Theo van Boven, told the Committee among other things that he thought overlaps of work generally could be avoided, that he was eager to share information that would be of use to the Committee, and that much of his recent work involved sending urgent appeals to countries, often in relation to article 3 of the Convention against Torture, which focused on refoulement. The appeals tended to be based on humanitarian grounds, Mr. van Boven said, while urgent appeals sent by the Committee were more often grounded in the legal terms of the Convention.
Committee members said, among other things, that the Special Rapporteur could perform a service by looking into questions of torture in countries that were not States parties to the Convention and so were not subject to scrutiny by the Committee, and that it also might be valuable if he investigated situations of ill-treatment in times of war or armed conflict.
The Committee and Special Rapporteur also considered the text of a draft joint statement intended to be released on June 26, the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, welcoming the adoption by the Commission on Human Rights of an optional protocol to the Convention against Torture. The protocol, which still must be approved by the Economic and Social Council and the General Assembly, would establish a mechanism for visits to places of detention.
The Committee will reconvene at 3 p.m. to issue its conclusions and recommendations on reports of Luxembourg and Saudi Arabia.

Discussion
THEO VAN BOVEN, Special Rapporteur on torture of the Commission on Human Rights, told the Committee among other things that he expected no great differences between his approach to the job and that of his predecessor, Nigel Rodley; that while the Special Rapporteur's tasks were different than those of the Committee some overlap probably could be expected; that in general he would try to stay clear of considering situations the Committee was seized of under article 20 of the Convention; and that he was eager to share information that would be of use to the Committee.

Mr. van Boven said that since beginning his work he had been very much involved with matters of urgency; he had sent from five to ten urgent appeals per week, sometimes on his own behalf, sometimes in cooperation with other Commission Special Rapporteurs. Generally these appeals were humanitarian in nature, as opposed to the legally based appeals that tended to be used by the Committee. The credibility of the information he was provided with was important in determining the sending and contents of appeals. Among the urgent messages he sent were a number related to article 3 of the Convention, on refoulement.
Cooperation and coordination were important issues, Mr. van Boven said, and that applied not only to him and the Committee but within the Secretariat, as different units were involved.
In the discussion that followed, Committee members said among other things that the Special Rapporteur could help by investigating situations in countries that were not States parties to the Convention against Torture; that problems of torture occurring in time of war or armed conflict could be a useful focus for the Special Rapporteur's work; and that exchanges of information, especially regarding country situations the Committee was considering under article 20, were valuable.



* *** *