COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE OFFERS CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON INITIAL REPORT OF FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF YUGOSLAVIA

MORNING
HR/CAT/98/36
16 November 1998



Starts Consideration of Report of United Kingdom


The Committee against Torture this morning issued its conclusions and recommendations on the initial report of the Government of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia which it considered last week, expressing concern over the numerous accounts of the use of torture by the State police forces that it had received from non-governmental organizations.

The Committee was also gravely concerned over the lack of sufficient investigation, prosecution and punishment by the competent authorities of suspected torturers or those breaching article 16 of the Convention against Torture, as well as with the insufficient reaction to complaints of such abused persons.

In its recommendations, the Committee urged the verbatim incorporation of the crime of torture into the Yugoslav criminal codes. In order to diminish the recurrence of torture, it recommended that the State party legally and practically ensure the independence of the judiciary, the unrestricted access to counsel immediately after arrest and shortening of the length of police custody to a maximum period of 48 hours, among others.

Also this morning, the Committee started its consideration of the third periodic report of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland on how that country implements the provisions of the Convention. An 11-member Government delegation was present to defend the report.

Introducing the report, Tony Pearson, Director of Security, Prison Services, Home Office of the United Kingdom, said that rights, safeguards and equality of opportunity formed a central theme in the Agreement signed in Belfast on Good Friday 1998. The Agreement, in addition to establishing a devolved Assembly, also sought to provide a new body to be called the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission.

As States parties to the Convention against Torture, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the United Kingdom are obliged to submit periodic reports to the Committee on their compliance with the provisions of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

The Committee will reconvene at 3 p.m, to continue its consideration of the third periodic report of the United Kingdom.

Conclusions and Recommendations on Report of Federal Republic of Yugoslavia

The Committee found as a positive aspect, the provisions of the Constitution which forbid all violence against a person deprived of liberty and any extortion of a confession or statement. The Criminal Code defined the punishable offence of unlawful deprivation of freedom, extortion of depositions and maltreatment in the discharge of office which was also positive.

Regarding the factors and difficulties impeding the application of the provisions of the Convention, the Committee took into account the situation in which the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia currently found itself, especially with respect to the unrest and ethnic friction in the province of Kosovo. However, the Committee emphasized that no exceptional circumstances could ever provide justification for failure to comply with the terms of the Convention.

The Committee's concerns related mainly to legislation which did not comply with the Convention and, more gravely, the situation regarding the implementation of the Convention. With respect to legislation, the Committee was concerned over the absence in the criminal law of a provision defining torture as a specific crime in accordance with article 1 of the Convention.

The Committee stressed that regulating pre-trial detention was of specific significance for the prevention of torture. The report did not mention the duration of the post-indictment pre-trial detention, which should not be unduly extended. With regards to the factual situation in Yugoslavia, the Committee was extremely concerned over the numerous accounts of the use of torture by the State police forces that it had received from non-governmental organizations. The concern of the Committee derived also from reliable information that confessions obtained by torture were admitted as evidence by the courts even in cases where the use of torture had been confirmed by pre-trial medical examinations.

The Committee was also gravely concerned over the lack of sufficient investigation, prosecution and punishment by the competent authorities of suspected torturers or those breaching article 16 of the Convention, as well as with the insufficient reaction to the complaints of such abused persons, resulting in the de facto impunity of the perpetrators of acts of torture.

In its recommendations, the Committee called upon the State party to fulfil the legal, political and moral obligations it undertook when it ratified the Convention. It recommended the verbatim incorporation of the crime of torture into the Yugoslav criminal codes. In order to diminish the recurrence of torture in that country, the Committee recommended that the State party legally and practically ensure the independence of the judiciary, the unrestricted access to counsel immediately after arrest, shortening of the length of police custody to a maximum period of 48 hours, shortening of the length of pre-trial post-indictment detention, strict exclusion of all evidence directly or indirectly derived from torture, effective civil redress and a vigorous criminal prosecution in all cases of torture.

Report of United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

The third periodic report of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (document CAT/C/44/Add.1) reviews the application of the Convention against Torture on an article-by-article basis, and notes that the Government recognizes that many non-governmental organizations and other independent bodies had a significant part to play in developing ways of preventing torture and other forms of ill-treatment. It says that a number of organizations have expressed concerns about aspects of current asylum policy, and its effect in a number of individual cases. In light of these concerns, the Government is currently conducting a wide-ranging study of the asylum process as a whole.

The report mostly carried responses to the concerns and recommendations of the Committee during its consideration of the second periodic report of the State party. It says that no prison is wholly privatized; instead, the management of certain prisons is contracted out to private sector companies; six prisons are currently managed by private sector companies in England and Wales. In addition, the report says that the Government is currently reviewing all aspects of immigration detention strategy including the use of bail, detention criteria, length of detention, options for independent review and alternatives to detention.

Presentation of Report

TONY PEARSON, Director of Security, Prison Services, Home Office of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, said that the country's parliament had in May of this year confirmed the abolition of the death penalty for all civil offences and the Government had subsequently announced that it would also abolish the death penalty for military offences in peace and wartime.

Mr. Pearson told the Committee that a new Human Rights Act had received Royal Assent on 9 November and that it was a key piece of legislation in the Government's comprehensive programme of constitutional reform. Under the Act, people who believed that a public authority had breached their rights enshrined in the Convention would be able to bring proceedings to domestic courts rather than having to take their case to Strasbourg. If a court ruled in the favour of the plaintiffs, it would be able to award whatever remedy was open to it, including damages, he added.

Mr. Pearson stressed that the Act would help strengthen the human rights culture in the United Kingdom and the rights enshrined in the Convention would permeate the Government and legal system at all levels. The impact of this, over time, was expected to be considerable. Courts would have to interpret legislation so that it was compatible with the Convention’s rights. In addition, a Government Minister would in future have to make a statement about whether new Government legislation was compatible with the Convention. That was designed to enhance the scrutiny of the human rights aspects of legislation when it was prepared, he said.

With regard to the situation in Northern Ireland, Mr. Pearson said that events had been moving at a very fast pace in the last few months and that rights, safeguards and equality of opportunity formed a central theme in the Agreement signed in Belfast on Good Friday 1998. The Agreement, in addition to establishing a devolved Assembly, also sought to provide a new body to be called the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission.

Finally, on the recent developments relating to former Chilean military ruler Augusto Pinochet, Mr. Pearson said that the House of Lords had finished hearing submissions but had not yet reached a judgement on the issues relating to his arrest.

HENRY STEEL of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office of the United Kingdom, confirmed that there had been no cases to date, in any territory, in which anybody had been accused of the offence of torture or any equivalent offence. Nor had any territory received a request from any other country for the extradition of a person to answer to a charge of torture. And nobody been expelled or returned from any territory to another country in circumstances where there was any reason to think that that might have led to his or her being exposed to torture, he said.

Discussion

PETER THOMAS BURNS, the expert who served as rapporteur on the report of the United Kingdom, asked why there was no video and audio taping during the interrogation of suspects. Detaining a person for seven days without any access to a counsel was a breach of article 16 of the Convention. He stressed that a person once detained should be presented to the competent judicial authority within 48 hours.

Mr. Burns further asked if the security system which segregated very dangerous prisoners was still in practise? He said there were cases of female prisoners considered to be dangerous who were held in all-male prisons, even though some of them were pregnant. He mentioned the names of Roison McAlisky and Eliane Moore as examples. He asked about the result of investigation concerning the case of Omar Rafig?

With regard to overseas dependencies, Mr. Burns said that there had been some noticeable improvement concerning corporal punishment, but it had not been
abolished in the British Virgin Islands. He asked about the constitutional arrangement regarding those islands.

Concerning the case of Mr. Pinochet, Mr. Burns said that although the case was still in the hands of the judicial magistrates, the State party faced two conflicting laws, one concerning extradition and the other concerning immunity for a head of State. Although the House of Lords was to give its verdict soon, it was evident that inhumane acts were committed against citizens, including foreigners, during the dictatorial regime of Pinochet. The question was simple. How would the United Kingdom reconcile its internal laws with its international obligations in articles 4 and 5 of the Convention?

BENT SORENSEN, alternate country rapporteur to the report of the United Kingdom, said that article 3 of the Convention indicated that any expulsion of a foreigner should keep in mind that it be to a safe country where the individual would not risk being tortured. Asylum-seekers in the United Kingdom did not have the possibility to appeal decisions. In addition, the report said that 1.5 per cent of those who applied for asylum were detained on grounds that they would not comply with the terms of their temporary admission, or on grounds of national security. However, it was alleged that up to 50 per cent of those who applied for asylum were detained.

As regards the establishments designed to hold exceptional-risk prisoners, the expert wanted to know the number of hours the detainees were kept in their cells and the number of hours they might stay outside them.

Other experts also indicated that the number of deaths in police custody, including suicide, had been high during the last three years and wanted to know the ethnic background of the victims. They said that many of the victims were allegedly of African and Asian origin. The deaths in custody were attributed to restraining procedures by police. The experts wanted to know the results of the investigations, if any, and the measures taken to punish those responsible for the deaths of detainees in police custody.