Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Press releases Treaty bodies
COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE OPENS FORTY-SECOND SESSION
27 April 2009
Share
Committee against Torture
27 April 2009
High Commissioner for Human Rights Briefs Committee on New Developments
The Committee against Torture this morning opened its forty-second session at the Palais Wilson in Geneva, hearing an address by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay and adopting its agenda and programme of work.
Ms. Pillay, with regard to the most important new developments since the Committee’s last session, recalled that the Durban Review Conference had been held last week in Geneva. The outcome document for that Conference, which had been adopted by acclamation on 21 April, contained carefully worded language that sent strong and appropriate signals that would help the international community's endeavour to fight racism and extremism in all manifestations. It provided proper answers to the misinformation and misunderstandings that clouded much of the preparatory process for the Conference and had prompted a number of countries to stay away from the Conference table – a position that she had been critical of. However, a number of States that had stayed away in Europe were now indicating their approval of the outcome.
Turning to developments related to the Convention against Torture and its Optional Protocol, Ms. Pillay noted that Rwanda had become the one hundred and forty-sixth State party to the Convention on 15 December 2008 and that there were now 64 States that recognized the competence of the Committee to deal with individual complaints, with the acceptance by Kazakhstan of the procedure under Article 22 of the Convention in February 2008. Montenegro had ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention on 6 March 2009, bringing the number of States parties to 46, close to the 50-member mark that would trigger an expansion of the membership of the Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture to 25. At this session, the Committee would consider initial reports of Chad, Honduras and Nicaragua, and the periodic reports of Chile, Israel, New Zealand and the Philippines. In addition, the Committee would adopt lists of issues to be addressed to the seven States parties whose reports would be examined at the next session in November and, in that context, would meet with United Nations agencies as well as national human rights institutions and non-governmental organizations of several countries whose reports would be considered.
In the following discussion, the need for more funding was primarily highlighted. Claudio Grossman, Chairperson of the Committee, said the issue of resources was "paramount". In 2010 there would be 22 countries to be considered, and that was simply impossible given the current conditions of work. Delays in considering reports took away from the legitimacy of the Committee, when it could not take up reports or present lists of issues in a timely fashion. An Expert also drew attention to the fact that, once the Subcommittee against Torture reached 50 ratifications, it would have 25 members. Their Committee, with its 146 States parties, had only 10. By the end of each session, the schedule became so crowded, that it prevented Experts from properly analysing the issues. The Committee either needed to increase its membership or to have an additional annual session.
The next public meeting of the Committee is scheduled to take place at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 28 April, when it will take up the second periodic report of the Philippines (CAT/C/PHL/2).
Statements
NAVI PILLAY, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, informing the Committee of the most important new developments since its last session, noted that on 10 December 2008, on the occasion of the sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the General Assembly had adopted by consensus the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The Protocol, which had been 20 years in the making, established a procedure for individual complaints, inquiries and inter-State communications concerning violations of the rights in the Covenant. The Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities had also been established, and had met in Geneva for the first time from 23 to 27 February 2009. She wished also to refer briefly to the first meeting of that Committee, where they had run into a conflict over what constituted a majority, and had also developed a procedure for a rotating Chair.
Regarding reform of the treaty body system, the eighth Inter-Committee meeting held in December had been dedicated exclusively to harmonization of working methods and focused on reporting guidelines, follow-up to concluding observations and the Universal Periodic Review mechanism of the Human Rights Council. Ms. Pillay made the link between the Universal Periodic Review and the work of the Committee, observing that, at the fourth Universal Periodic Review session in February, two of the countries reviewed (the Philippines and Israel) would be considered during the Committee's present session and the relevant documents were in their files. The fifth Universal Periodic Review session, which would take place from 4 to 15 May, would consider a further 16 States, among them three States parties whose reports would be considered by the Committee at this session (Chad, Chile and New Zealand). Several other countries for which the Committee would adopt lists of issues had already been considered under the Universal Periodic Review, and documents relating to those reviews had also been provided to the Committee.
As everyone knew, the Durban Review Conference had been held last week in Geneva, and the outcome document for the Conference, which had been adopted by acclamation on 21 April, was in their files. Ms. Pillay stressed that the outcome document contained carefully worded language that sent strong and appropriate signals that would help the international community's endeavour to fight racism and extremism in all manifestations. It provided proper answers to the misinformation and misunderstandings that clouded much of the preparatory process for the Conference and had prompted a number of countries to stay away from the Conference table – a position that she had been critical of. However, she signalled that a number of States that had stayed away in Europe were now indicating their approval of the outcome.
Turning to developments related to the Convention against Torture and its Optional Protocol, Ms. Pillay noted that Rwanda had become the one hundred and forty-sixth State party to the Convention on 15 December 2008 and that there were now 64 States that recognized the competence of the Committee to deal with individual complaints, with the acceptance by Kazakhstan of the procedure under Article 22 of the Convention in February 2008. Montenegro had ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention on 6 March 2009, bringing the number of States parties to 46, close to the 50-member mark that would trigger an expansion of the membership of the Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture to 25.
Seven States parties had submitted their reports since the Committee's last session, bringing the number of reports pending consideration to 16, in addition to the 7 reports that would be considered at the current session, the High Commissioner continued. Moreover, the Syrian Arab Republic had submitted its report following the Committee's decision to send reminders to States parties that had long overdue initial reports, which proved the usefulness of the proactive attitude that the Committee had adopted.
Highlighting some of the issues before the Committee during this session, Ms. Pillay noted that the Committee would consider initial reports of Chad, Honduras and Nicaragua, and the periodic reports of Chile, Israel, New Zealand and the Philippines. In addition, the Committee would adopt lists of issues to be addressed to the seven States parties whose reports would be examined at the next session in November and, in that context, would meet with United Nations agencies as well as national human rights institutions and non-governmental organizations of several countries whose reports would be considered. Follow-up on concluding observations and individual communications would also be discussed. Among other issues related to the Committee's methods of work, it was expected that the Committee would continue to work on its revised treaty-specific reporting guidelines, which it hoped to complete by November 2009.
In conclusion, the High Commissioner assured the Committee of the full support of her Office and the services of the Secretariat in assisting it in fulfilling its mandate.
CLAUDIO GROSSMAN, Chairperson of the Committee, said the Committee would study the High Commissioner's comments and look at what way they could contribute to the common goal of promotion and protection of human rights. Of particular interest had been the approval of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. In the region he was from they had a similar instrument, the Protocol of San Salvador, which provided a reporting mechanism for protecting a number of civil and political rights.
As mentioned, the Committee would talk about its methods of work at this session, Mr. Grossman observed. The issue of resources was paramount here. In 2010 there would be 22 countries to be considered, and that was simply impossible given the current conditions of work. Delays in considering reports took away from the legitimacy of the Committee, when it could not take up reports or present lists of issues in a timely fashion. The High Commissioner and her Office played an important role in ensuring that the Committee had the proper conditions to fulfil its role.
Experts then raised a number of issues, including discussions in the Inter-Committee Meeting on ways to enhance its decision-making role, including by making its decisions binding on the treaty bodies. An Expert stressed particularly the need for the allocation of additional resources by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights for the human rights treaties bodies in order for them to be able to effectively carry out their mandates. In that connection, he noted that the Subcommittee against Torture would have 25 members once it reached 50 ratifications. However, this Committee, with its 146 States parties, had only 10. By the end of each session, the schedule became so crowded, that it prevented Experts from properly analysing the issues. The Committee either needed to increase its membership or to have an additional annual session.
Also today, the Committee discussed its methods of work, including the issues to be raised at the upcoming meeting with States parties, such as the need to ensure that States responded to lists of issues on time. The new reporting procedure, the list of issues prior to reporting, was also discussed at length. The Committee had adopted the procedure two years ago to better focus State party reports and to streamline reporting procedures, with a view to consolidating periodic reports and responses to the list of issues. However, the actual mechanics of working out this new procedure created confusion among members. It was also noted that, as the mandates of five members would be expiring on 31 December 2009, there would also be an election of new members at this session.
__________
For use of the information media; not an official record
27 April 2009
High Commissioner for Human Rights Briefs Committee on New Developments
The Committee against Torture this morning opened its forty-second session at the Palais Wilson in Geneva, hearing an address by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay and adopting its agenda and programme of work.
Ms. Pillay, with regard to the most important new developments since the Committee’s last session, recalled that the Durban Review Conference had been held last week in Geneva. The outcome document for that Conference, which had been adopted by acclamation on 21 April, contained carefully worded language that sent strong and appropriate signals that would help the international community's endeavour to fight racism and extremism in all manifestations. It provided proper answers to the misinformation and misunderstandings that clouded much of the preparatory process for the Conference and had prompted a number of countries to stay away from the Conference table – a position that she had been critical of. However, a number of States that had stayed away in Europe were now indicating their approval of the outcome.
Turning to developments related to the Convention against Torture and its Optional Protocol, Ms. Pillay noted that Rwanda had become the one hundred and forty-sixth State party to the Convention on 15 December 2008 and that there were now 64 States that recognized the competence of the Committee to deal with individual complaints, with the acceptance by Kazakhstan of the procedure under Article 22 of the Convention in February 2008. Montenegro had ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention on 6 March 2009, bringing the number of States parties to 46, close to the 50-member mark that would trigger an expansion of the membership of the Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture to 25. At this session, the Committee would consider initial reports of Chad, Honduras and Nicaragua, and the periodic reports of Chile, Israel, New Zealand and the Philippines. In addition, the Committee would adopt lists of issues to be addressed to the seven States parties whose reports would be examined at the next session in November and, in that context, would meet with United Nations agencies as well as national human rights institutions and non-governmental organizations of several countries whose reports would be considered.
In the following discussion, the need for more funding was primarily highlighted. Claudio Grossman, Chairperson of the Committee, said the issue of resources was "paramount". In 2010 there would be 22 countries to be considered, and that was simply impossible given the current conditions of work. Delays in considering reports took away from the legitimacy of the Committee, when it could not take up reports or present lists of issues in a timely fashion. An Expert also drew attention to the fact that, once the Subcommittee against Torture reached 50 ratifications, it would have 25 members. Their Committee, with its 146 States parties, had only 10. By the end of each session, the schedule became so crowded, that it prevented Experts from properly analysing the issues. The Committee either needed to increase its membership or to have an additional annual session.
The next public meeting of the Committee is scheduled to take place at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 28 April, when it will take up the second periodic report of the Philippines (CAT/C/PHL/2).
Statements
NAVI PILLAY, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, informing the Committee of the most important new developments since its last session, noted that on 10 December 2008, on the occasion of the sixtieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the General Assembly had adopted by consensus the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The Protocol, which had been 20 years in the making, established a procedure for individual complaints, inquiries and inter-State communications concerning violations of the rights in the Covenant. The Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities had also been established, and had met in Geneva for the first time from 23 to 27 February 2009. She wished also to refer briefly to the first meeting of that Committee, where they had run into a conflict over what constituted a majority, and had also developed a procedure for a rotating Chair.
Regarding reform of the treaty body system, the eighth Inter-Committee meeting held in December had been dedicated exclusively to harmonization of working methods and focused on reporting guidelines, follow-up to concluding observations and the Universal Periodic Review mechanism of the Human Rights Council. Ms. Pillay made the link between the Universal Periodic Review and the work of the Committee, observing that, at the fourth Universal Periodic Review session in February, two of the countries reviewed (the Philippines and Israel) would be considered during the Committee's present session and the relevant documents were in their files. The fifth Universal Periodic Review session, which would take place from 4 to 15 May, would consider a further 16 States, among them three States parties whose reports would be considered by the Committee at this session (Chad, Chile and New Zealand). Several other countries for which the Committee would adopt lists of issues had already been considered under the Universal Periodic Review, and documents relating to those reviews had also been provided to the Committee.
As everyone knew, the Durban Review Conference had been held last week in Geneva, and the outcome document for the Conference, which had been adopted by acclamation on 21 April, was in their files. Ms. Pillay stressed that the outcome document contained carefully worded language that sent strong and appropriate signals that would help the international community's endeavour to fight racism and extremism in all manifestations. It provided proper answers to the misinformation and misunderstandings that clouded much of the preparatory process for the Conference and had prompted a number of countries to stay away from the Conference table – a position that she had been critical of. However, she signalled that a number of States that had stayed away in Europe were now indicating their approval of the outcome.
Turning to developments related to the Convention against Torture and its Optional Protocol, Ms. Pillay noted that Rwanda had become the one hundred and forty-sixth State party to the Convention on 15 December 2008 and that there were now 64 States that recognized the competence of the Committee to deal with individual complaints, with the acceptance by Kazakhstan of the procedure under Article 22 of the Convention in February 2008. Montenegro had ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention on 6 March 2009, bringing the number of States parties to 46, close to the 50-member mark that would trigger an expansion of the membership of the Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture to 25.
Seven States parties had submitted their reports since the Committee's last session, bringing the number of reports pending consideration to 16, in addition to the 7 reports that would be considered at the current session, the High Commissioner continued. Moreover, the Syrian Arab Republic had submitted its report following the Committee's decision to send reminders to States parties that had long overdue initial reports, which proved the usefulness of the proactive attitude that the Committee had adopted.
Highlighting some of the issues before the Committee during this session, Ms. Pillay noted that the Committee would consider initial reports of Chad, Honduras and Nicaragua, and the periodic reports of Chile, Israel, New Zealand and the Philippines. In addition, the Committee would adopt lists of issues to be addressed to the seven States parties whose reports would be examined at the next session in November and, in that context, would meet with United Nations agencies as well as national human rights institutions and non-governmental organizations of several countries whose reports would be considered. Follow-up on concluding observations and individual communications would also be discussed. Among other issues related to the Committee's methods of work, it was expected that the Committee would continue to work on its revised treaty-specific reporting guidelines, which it hoped to complete by November 2009.
In conclusion, the High Commissioner assured the Committee of the full support of her Office and the services of the Secretariat in assisting it in fulfilling its mandate.
CLAUDIO GROSSMAN, Chairperson of the Committee, said the Committee would study the High Commissioner's comments and look at what way they could contribute to the common goal of promotion and protection of human rights. Of particular interest had been the approval of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. In the region he was from they had a similar instrument, the Protocol of San Salvador, which provided a reporting mechanism for protecting a number of civil and political rights.
As mentioned, the Committee would talk about its methods of work at this session, Mr. Grossman observed. The issue of resources was paramount here. In 2010 there would be 22 countries to be considered, and that was simply impossible given the current conditions of work. Delays in considering reports took away from the legitimacy of the Committee, when it could not take up reports or present lists of issues in a timely fashion. The High Commissioner and her Office played an important role in ensuring that the Committee had the proper conditions to fulfil its role.
Experts then raised a number of issues, including discussions in the Inter-Committee Meeting on ways to enhance its decision-making role, including by making its decisions binding on the treaty bodies. An Expert stressed particularly the need for the allocation of additional resources by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights for the human rights treaties bodies in order for them to be able to effectively carry out their mandates. In that connection, he noted that the Subcommittee against Torture would have 25 members once it reached 50 ratifications. However, this Committee, with its 146 States parties, had only 10. By the end of each session, the schedule became so crowded, that it prevented Experts from properly analysing the issues. The Committee either needed to increase its membership or to have an additional annual session.
Also today, the Committee discussed its methods of work, including the issues to be raised at the upcoming meeting with States parties, such as the need to ensure that States responded to lists of issues on time. The new reporting procedure, the list of issues prior to reporting, was also discussed at length. The Committee had adopted the procedure two years ago to better focus State party reports and to streamline reporting procedures, with a view to consolidating periodic reports and responses to the list of issues. However, the actual mechanics of working out this new procedure created confusion among members. It was also noted that, as the mandates of five members would be expiring on 31 December 2009, there would also be an election of new members at this session.
__________
For use of the information media; not an official record
VIEW THIS PAGE IN: