COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE MEETS WITH SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR, OFFICIALS OF VOLUNTARY FUND

CAT
30th session
15 May 2003
Morning




The Committee against Torture met this morning with the Commission on Human Rights' Special Rapporteur on the question of torture to review matters of cooperation and coordination, and to provide updates on each other's activities.
Later it met with two members of the Board of Trustees of the Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture.
The Special Rapporteur, Theo van Boven, said in an introductory statement that he had focused recently on the manufacture and trade in equipment used for torture, with an eye to efforts to control and ultimately ban it; that he had visited Uzbekistan and issued recommendations similar to those made by the Committee following the Committee's examination of a report by that country; and that he was continuing with his communications with numerous Governments in response to allegations of torture and ill-treatment.
Committee members mentioned, among other things, the panel's plans to issue a general comment on article 2 of the Convention against Torture; their frequent reliance on information provided by the Special Rapporteur during their examination of country reports; and potential cooperation between the Special Rapporteur and the sub-committee to be established under the new Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture.
Ivan Tosevski, Acting Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture, said in a brief address that the current financial situation of the fund was worrisome – so far this year, donations had come to only one-third of the money received by the Fund last year – and that the Board was sometimes questioned on the matter of the definition of torture, as some donors had been saying the definition was too vague.
In addition, during the morning session, the Committee approved a statement welcoming the adoption of the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture, noting that the Protocol's objective was “establishment of a system of regular visits undertaken by independent international or national bodies to places where people are deprived of their liberty, in order to prevent torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment”; and urging States parties to the Convention to ratify the Protocol, to set up visiting mechanisms at the domestic level, and to recognize forthwith the power of the Sub-Committee on Prevention to conduct visits to any place where persons were deprived of their liberty.
In other action, the Committee invited human rights Special Rapporteurs and treaty bodies to offer it advice on its competence under article 20 of the Convention, which deals with occasions where reliable information is received which appears to contain well-founded indications that torture is being systematically practiced in the territory of a State party.
The Committee appointed one of its Experts, Sayed Kassem el Masry, as Co-Rapporteur on follow-up to the recommendations made on country reports. Mr. el Masry replaces the late Co-Rapporteur, Alejandro Gonzalez Poblete. The other Co-Rapporteur is Committee Expert Felice Gaer. Expert Fernando Mariño Menendez was appointed alternate Rapporteur on follow-up.
The Committee will reconvene at 3 p.m. to issue its conclusions and recommendations on reports of Belgium and Moldova and to adopt its annual report for 2003.

Remarks of Special Rapporteur on Question of Torture
THEO VAN BOVEN, the Commission on Human Rights' Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, said the special mechanisms of the Commission on Human Rights and the treaty bodies were meant to carry out complementary functions and there was always a need for cooperation and coordination. Consultations with the Secretariat were vital, and he also cooperated on occasion with other mechanisms of the Commission, such as those on enforced disappearances, extra-judicial executions, and arbitrary detention.
One of his recent concerns was monitoring and investigating the manufacture and transfer of equipment used for torture, with a view to controlling it and ultimately banning it, Mr. van Boven said. There was increasing interest in the issue, and he hoped next year to present a follow-up report on the matter.
Country visits and contacts with Governments had been an extensive part of his activities, Mr. van Boven said. There had been a good degree of cooperation on the part of Governments in responding to allegations of ill-treatment. He hoped in future to increase the pace of contact with Governments, as matters related to allegations of torture should be dealt with quickly. Among country visits he had carried out had been a trip to Uzbekistan, Mr. van Boven said, and after fact-finding efforts his recommendations to the Government had been similar to those of the Committee, if more specific in certain areas. Follow-up was important, Mr. van Boven said, and he was focusing on trying to improve follow-up to the recommendations he made to countries – Governments, national mechanisms, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, and the United Nations in general also had a role to play here. In future reports, he would have a special section on follow-up.
This year he planned visits to Spain and – pending finalization of details -- China, Mr. van Boven said. There was a chance he also would visit Bolivia or Nepal, and the Commission on Human Rights had asked some eight or nine Rapporteurs to seek invitations from Turkmenistan for a visit.

Remarks of Acting Chairman of Board of Trustees of Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture
IVAN TOSEVSKI, Acting Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture, said the current situation was worrisome; so far this year, the board had received only one-third of the amount of money it had received last year; meanwhile, several additional projects had been taken on, bringing the total number of projects to more than 200. However, it was expected that some of the pledges already made would be realized soon through the arrival of actual contributions.
Another matter was the definition of torture, Mr. Tosevski said. Some donors had been insisting that the Board of Trustees be more precise in its definition of what torture was, yet the Board hardly felt qualified to deal with such a complicated issue. The Board would be grateful for the Committee's help; it already had discussed the matter with the Special Rapporteur, Mr. van Boven.



* *** *