COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE STARTS REVIEW OF CROATIA’S THIRD PERIODIC REPORT

6 May 2004



The Committee against Torture this morning started its review of the third periodic report of Croatia on how that country is complying with the provisions of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

Introducing the report, Ivan Damjanovic, Assistant Minister, Directorate for the Prison System, Ministry of Justice of Croatia, said his country promoted the protection of human rights at the regional and global levels as part of its foreign policy, either through bilateral contacts or in international fora, and it actively participated in developing new standards in the field of human rights. It also firmly supported strengthening the mechanisms for the protection of human rights within the United Nations system, he added

Ole Vedel Rasmussen, the Committee Expert and Rapporteur for the report of Croatia, asked a number of questions on why the State party did not grant asylum to any asylum seekers; on reported cases of violence in reception centres for illegal immigrants and asylum seekers; on prison conditions; and on ethnically motivated violence against Roma, among other things.

Alexander M. Yakovlev, the Committee Expert who served as Co-Rapporteur for the report, and other Committee Experts also raised questions, among other things, on a prisoner’s immediate access to his or her family, a lawyer and a physician; measures taken against police officers who caused bodily harm to detainees; the policy of indictment of war criminals; monitoring of prison facilities and particularly on sexual violence; the situation of juvenile prisoners; bullying in the army; and the prosecution of persons who committed crimes of torture extra-territorially.

Other members of the delegation were Berislav Mance, Head of International Relations, Ministry of Internal Affairs; Petar Velc, Head of the Police Academy, Ministry of Internal Affairs; Branko Socanac, Minister Counsellor, Permanent Mission of Croatia in Geneva; Sanja Stimac, Head of the Department for International Legal Cooperation, Ministry of Justice; Romana Kusanic, First Secretary, Human Rights Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Vesna Becic, Advisor, Department for Statistics, Analysis and Development, Ministry of Internal Affairs; and Vera Andrassy and Vesna Grbin, Interpreters.

The delegation of Croatia will return to the Committee at 3 p.m. on Friday, 7 May, to provide its response to the questions raised this morning.

As one of the 135 States parties to the Convention, Croatia must submit periodic reports to the Committee on the measures it is undertaking to comply with the provisions of the treaty.

When the Committee reconvenes at 3 p.m. this afternoon, it will hear the response of Monaco to questions raised during the consideration of its report.

Report of Croatia

The third periodic report of Croatia (CAT/C/54/Add.3) gives details of the additional measures undertaken by the State party since the Committee considered its second periodic report in 1998. It says the country’s Criminal Code incriminates the act of torture according to the definition of article 1 of the Convention. In cases of the violation of the provisions of the Convention against Torture, the competent bodies are the courts of law, the Attorney General, the police, the Ombudsman, and other administrative bodies. The courts of law pass judgments based on the Constitution and the laws and ensure equality before the law.

The report notes that during the last five years, the state of security on the overall territory is regarded as positive. This accounts for the decline in the number of most severe criminal acts like murder, robbery, and grand larceny.

Introduction of Report

IVAN DAMJANOVIC, Assistant Minister, Directorate for the Prison System, Ministry of Justice of Croatia, said he was presenting the report under new circumstances, as Croatia had recently obtained a positive response to its request to join the European Commission and it was steadily progressing on the path to full membership of the European Union.

Croatia would like to be a reliable partner of the international community in combating international terrorism as well as all forms of organized crime, Mr. Damjanovic said. Establishing good governance and the rule of law, as well as encouraging the inter-cultural and inter-religious dialogue, were preventive tools in combating international terrorism and organized crime. Despite the fact that since 1995, no criminal offences of terrorism had been recorded in Croatia, the State was more than aware that no single country could stand alone in security matters.

Croatia had actively participated in the preparing of the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, and the Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Air and Sea, and was among the first countries to ratify them, the Croatian Representative said. The Protocol against the Illicit Manufacturing and Trafficking in Firearms was currently in the process of ratification.

Mr. Damjanovic said Croatia would continue with its judiciary reform in order to achieve the highest attainable standards of efficiency, as well as to ensure prompt access to justice to all. Parliament had adopted amendments to the Judicial Act, which enabled redistribution of court cases from the most overburdened courts to the ones that were less burdened. The State budget for 2004 ensured funds for 100 newly employed judges and judicial advisors.

Croatia was one of the first countries to ratify the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, thus contributing to strengthening the universal rule of law and jurisdiction for the most serious crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide, he said. Croatia firmly supported the integrity, independence and effective functioning of the Court.

In conclusion, Mr. Damjanovic said his country promoted the protection of human rights at the regional and global levels as part of its foreign policy, either through bilateral contacts or in international fora, and it actively participated in developing new standards in the field of human rights. It also firmly supported strengthening the mechanisms for the protection of human rights within the United Nations system.

Response

Responding to written questions prepared by the Committee and addressed to the State party in advance, the delegation of Croatia said that foreigners who were ordered to leave the country for security reasons were expelled immediately. A foreigner who was illegally in the State territory should either leave voluntarily or would be expelled. If an individual’s presence was justified on ground that his life was endangered in the country of his origin, he could temporarily stay in Croatia.

Asked if the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) had free access to asylum seekers and their individual files, the delegation said that by submitting applications, the asylum seekers had certain obligations and rights. The authorities carried out their work in collaboration with UNHCR. Foreigners who were not immediately expelled due to lack of identity papers were placed in centres run by the Ministry of the Interior. The process of asylum applications was examined in accordance to the law of the country. Asylum seekers whose application had been rejected and who would be expelled were placed in special accommodations. A foreigner arriving by air without a valid travel document was returned at the expense of the airline carrier.

The delegation said that between 1998 and 2000, there had been no prosecutions with regard to torture under the terms of article 176 of the Criminal Code. However, there had been a few cases of “extortion” of statements, which were being prosecuted.

On the issue of collaboration with the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the delegation said Croatia had continued its cooperation with the Tribunal in accordance with its organized internal laws. The Government, via the liaison office of the Tribunal in Croatia, had been supplying responses and was arranging witness meetings. So far, more than 14,000 responses had been given to the questions addressed to the Government by the Tribunal.

Concerning the 1996 General Amnesty Law, the delegation said that the Law did not cover persons who were involved in armed rebellion against the State, in worst forms of human violations, and genocide, among other things. In addition, desertion from the army and serving in the enemy’s army were not part of the Amnesty Law. Only certain common crimes were included by the Law.

With regards to complaints against the police, the delegation said that any citizen had the right to lodge a complaint, as a victim, against a police officer who committed a prejudice. The authorities investigated such complaints and took appropriate criminal or disciplinary measures.

The judiciary carried out regular prison visits in order to ensure that the prison staff correctly treated prisoners, the delegation said. In the event that a prisoner lodged a complaint, a prompt investigation was carried out and the perpetrators of ill treatment were brought to justice.

Witnesses or defendants were protected by special interrogation methods which were regulated by the law, the delegation said. Such measures protected against ill treatment or intimidation and ensured impartial proceedings in cases of alleged torture.

Discussion

ALEXANDER M. YAKOVLEV, the Committee Expert who served as Co-Rapporteur for the report of Croatia, said the defence of the rights of prisoners and victims was essential. He asked what was the remedy if an act of torture occurred. The new law on police ethics was a positive measure. The development of other positive legislative measures was also necessary to implement the provisions of the Convention against Torture.

He asked if a prisoner had immediate access to his family, a lawyer and a physician after his arrest. On the issue of statistics, he said that their inclusion in the report would help the Committee to have an overview of the implementation of the provisions of the Convention.

Were disciplinary measures taken against police officers who had caused bodily harm to detainees, Mr. Yakovlev asked. In the case of bodily harm, the use of disciplinary measures might not be enough. The delegation was asked to provide information on the issue.

Mr. Yakovlev said that according to information the Committee had received, Croatia never granted asylum. He asked the delegation to clarify if this was true.

OLE VEDEL RASMUSSEN, the Committee Expert and Rapporteur for the report of Croatia, asked why persons with valid travel documents who applied for asylum in Croatia were returned to their country without their cases being considered. The return of the person to his country of origin might subject that person to a risk of torture.

According to the information he had received, Croatia never granted asylum to asylum seekers, Mr. Rasmussen said, and requested more information on this issue.

What mechanisms were used to verify if torture had taken place in prisons, the Rapporteur asked, adding that medical doctors should be trained to detect if acts of torture had been committed. The setting up of the centre for training of prison employees was a positive measure.

According to information he received, there were two camps in which illegal immigrants were kept before they were expelled. One was run by the Ministry of the Interior, and the other was run by the Red Cross and the High Commissioner for Refugees. Individuals had freedom of movement in the second camp. It was regrettable that due to lack of interpreters, asylum processes were delayed for several months. According to Amnesty International, violence against illegal immigrants in the detention centres was not reported by the authorities. He asked if the individuals in the camps had the right to recreational activities since they were held there for longer periods.

Croatia had done a lot to improve its prison system, Mr. Rasmussen said, adding that further measures had to be taken to train doctors on how to detect whether torture had been inflicted against inmates. He praised the setting up of the centre for training of penitentiary employees. What measures were taken to prevent inter-prisoner violence?

He asked if records were kept on the process of interrogation, including the duration, and the presence of other persons during the interrogation. The introduction of videotaping was also necessary to prevent any ill-treatment from taking place during the interrogation.



Non-State actors had perpetrated ethnically motivated violence against Roma, Mr . Rasmussen said. However, the State apparently did not promptly and thoroughly investigate such incidents. The delegation was asked to elaborate on this issue.

Other Committee Experts also asked, among other things, why asylum was not granted to those who justified their cases; if there was statistical data on racially motivated incidents; the policy of indictment of war criminals; where persons of Roma and Serb origin were imprisoned; monitoring of prison facilities, particularly concerning sexual violence; the situation of juvenile prisoners; bullying in the army; and the prosecution of persons who committed crimes of torture extra-territorially.