Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Press releases Treaty bodies
Default title
11 May 2000
Share
CAT
24th Session
11 May 2000
Morning
The Committee against Torture this morning began its consideration of the third periodic report of the Netherlands on that country’s implementation of the provisions of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
Introducing the report, the representatives of the European part of the Netherlands, the Netherlands Antilles and the Netherlands Aruba explained how their respective officials were implementing the treaty. In their introductions, they cited new regulations and laws which were enacted with the view to strengthen the prevention of acts of torture and ill-treatment.
Yu Mengjia and Felice Gaer, the two Committee experts who served as rapporteur and co-rapporteur respectively to the report of the Netherlands, queried the delegation on such issues as prison conditions, preventive detention, and the process of asylum requests, among other things.
The delegation of the Netherlands was led by Pim Dumoré, Head of the Political and Legal Division of the International Organizations Department of the Netherlands and included Louise de Bode-Olton of the Bureau for Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands Antilles; Marleen De Roos-Schoenmakers, Public Prosecutor in the City of Arnhem in the European part of the Netherlands; Jacob Struyker-Boudier, Bertil Niehoff and Bert De Boer of the Ministry of Justice of the European part of the Netherlands; Roeland Bocker of the Legal Department of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the European part of the Netherlands; and Henk-Cor van der Kwast from the Permanent Mission of the Netherlands to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
As one of the 119 States parties to the Convention, the Netherlands must submit periodic reports on its efforts to implement the provisions of the treaty.
The Netherlands will return to the Committee at 3.30 p.m. on Friday, 12 May, to provide its answers to the questions raised this morning.
When the Committee reconvenes at 3 p.m. this afternoon, it will hear the response of the United States to questions raised by the Committee experts yesterday on its initial report. At 4:30 p.m., the Committee will present its conclusions and recommendations on the report of El Salvador.
Report of the Netherlands
The third periodic report of the Netherlands (document CAT/C/44/Add.4 and 8) contains three parts in which it enumerates the measures undertaken in the European part of the Kingdom and its overseas territories of Antilles and Aruba. The report on the European part deals with asylum and deportation in which it provides information on how refugees are hosted and the legal applications in their cases. It also discusses the procedures through which asylum-seekers should pass. It says that in 1998, there have been 4,886 aliens in detention pending deportation, in addition to 10,866 persons expelled for illegal residency without requesting asylum.
The report on the Netherlands Antilles contains information about new developments in legislation and policy, and how the provisions of the Convention are being implemented. The Government of the Netherlands Antilles decided in 1995 that torture should be made a separate offence. The criminal procedural code was also revised in 1997 to reflect the offensive nature of torture.
In its third part, the report says that while Aruba's young and advanced constitutional system contains the main legal safeguards required by the human rights conventions, other legislation gives shape to the criminal law, the law of criminal procedure and the law governing the execution of custodial sentences. The report also enumerates the reforms made in Aruba's legal system since it obtained its separate constitutional status in 1986.
Introduction of Report
PIM DUMORE, Head of the Political and Legal Division of the International Organizations Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands, said his country wanted to maintain the highest possible standards of human rights and stressed that the basic rights of every individual should be guaranteed.
Internationally, the Netherlands wanted to be in the forefront of the fight against torture and had strongly supported the work of those who tried to expose acts of torture by Governments and who spoke out in the appropriate fora against those Governments who committed those acts, Mr. Dumoré said. It also supported the work of the Special Rapporteur on Torture, who played an invaluable role in advocating on behalf of the victims of torture. The Netherlands was the highest contributor to the United Nations Voluntary Fund for the Victims of Torture.
LOUISE DE BODE-OLTON, of the Bureau for Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands Antille, said the acts of torture under article 1 of the Convention were now explicitly defined as a separate offense in the national legislation. In the course of the past years, additional efforts had been made to correct the unfavourable situation of the correctional facilities of the Netherlands Antille. However, there were still a number of shortcomings to be dealt with, some of which might be rightly criticized. Some short and mid-term measures had led to progress in a number of areas.
In October 1999, the National Institute for Police Training was established as a result of the reorganization of the police force, she said. The institute was entrusted with training of all uniformed personnel who were working within the judicial system. It was also engaged in training of prison officials to foster the proper use of force and application of criminal procedures, practical investigation and reporting skills.
HENK-COR VAN DER KWAST, from the Permanent Mission of the Netherlands to the United Nations Office at Geneva, introducing the part of the report on the Netherlands Aruba, recalled that a new code of criminal procedure for Aruba had entered into effect in October 1997 thus removing several outdated regulations governing the execution of custodial sentences that were no longer applied in practice. This greatly improved the rights of suspects. The term of ten days for detention in police cells had not been shortened under the new code, but a suspect had the right to be brought before a judge within three days of his arrest.
The delegate affirmed that the Government of Aruba was not aware of any allegations, from either persons in police custody or in prison, of severe ill-treatment or torture. The Government had adopted and would continue to adopt all the necessary measures to guarantee each citizen the basic human rights, as enshrined in its constitution and several human rights treaties with validity for Aruba.
Consideration of Report
YU MENGJIA, the Committee expert who served as rapporteur to the report of the Netherlands, wanted to know which law -- law of the Kingdom or international laws - provided better protection against torture. It seemed that there had been some certitude that the national legislation was applied in the event of conflict between the domestic and international laws.
Referring to the new regulations introduced in processing asylum requests, a change had been made in the procedures in which an asylum-seeker had to present documents or certificates which justified his demands, and if not his case would be dismissed, Mr. Yu said. He said he was concerned about the introduction of the regulation which was not in conformity with relevant provisions of international conventions in matters of refugee cases.
With regard to the report relating to the Netherlands Antilles, Mr. Yu welcomed the introduction of a number of legislative measures designed to improve prison conditions and the situation of detainees. He said that the current prison conditions were deplorable and overcrowded; the condition of sanitation should also be improved; and inter-prison violence and revolts against prison conditions had been observed, to which some measures had been taken to ease the situation. The implementation of the new penal procedure code was also worth mentioning. However, he said that the teaching of human rights was interrupted due to lack of funds.
Concerning the Netherlands Aruba, Mr. Yu said that the draft law on the deprivation of liberty which would be presented to Aruba’s parliament did not contain an explicit prohibition of torture. He asked if the Government of Aruba had envisaged to explicitly prohibit torture in that text. He also asked how the Government was intending to bring changes to prison conditions which the Committee had expressed concern about during its consideration of the second report from that Government.
FELICE GAER, the Committee expert who served as co-rapporteur to the report, said she was concerned about the policy followed by the Government of the Netherlands with regard to the indictment of criminals of war. According to the report presented by the State, about 2,156 decisions on compensation to victims of war had been applied. It was interesting to know how the decisions were made in relation to the nature of the crime committed.
Ms. Gaer also expressed certain preoccupations on the composition and functioning of the independent committee set up by the regional police in order to monitor the prison conditions and situations of pre-trial detainees. How did the members of the committee release their report on their findings? she asked. She also wanted to know about the conditions of the physical search, which was widely effected in Rotterdam in November 1999, on persons entering certain zones of the city.
Ms. Gaer also expressed concern about the treatment of prisoners in the high security cells of certain prisons. She stressed that the Government had rejected the issue referred to in the conclusions of the European Committee on the Prevention of Torture. She recalled that some years back, a prisoner who had been incarcerated in the high security cells had been killed by violence inflicted on him by another prisoner. During that incident, several prison guards were in the nearby area but it seemed that they had received instructions not to intervene because of the danger which might be incurred.
With regards to the Netherlands Antilles, Ms. Gaer said that a board had been established in 1962 to enter prisons any time and to take preventive measures. She wanted to know the success of the board in preventing torture in prisons. She asked how prisoners lodged complaints to the board. She said the inter-prisoner violence was of concern. She wanted to receive a breakdown of prison population according to ethnicity, sex, and nationality.
Ms. Gaer wished to receive more information on the preventive mechanisms, protection and investigation of acts of torture in Aruba. She also wanted to know if a case of death in custody had so far been investigated by the authorities.
Another Committee expert wanted to know why the procurator general of the Netherlands Antille did not investigate an allegation which alluded to the finding of an electric-shock device in one of the police stations. Another expert also asked the delegation about the United Nations involvement in the granting of independence to Aruba; and more information was requested on the November 1993 plebiscite in Aruba.
24th Session
11 May 2000
Morning
The Committee against Torture this morning began its consideration of the third periodic report of the Netherlands on that country’s implementation of the provisions of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
Introducing the report, the representatives of the European part of the Netherlands, the Netherlands Antilles and the Netherlands Aruba explained how their respective officials were implementing the treaty. In their introductions, they cited new regulations and laws which were enacted with the view to strengthen the prevention of acts of torture and ill-treatment.
Yu Mengjia and Felice Gaer, the two Committee experts who served as rapporteur and co-rapporteur respectively to the report of the Netherlands, queried the delegation on such issues as prison conditions, preventive detention, and the process of asylum requests, among other things.
The delegation of the Netherlands was led by Pim Dumoré, Head of the Political and Legal Division of the International Organizations Department of the Netherlands and included Louise de Bode-Olton of the Bureau for Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands Antilles; Marleen De Roos-Schoenmakers, Public Prosecutor in the City of Arnhem in the European part of the Netherlands; Jacob Struyker-Boudier, Bertil Niehoff and Bert De Boer of the Ministry of Justice of the European part of the Netherlands; Roeland Bocker of the Legal Department of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the European part of the Netherlands; and Henk-Cor van der Kwast from the Permanent Mission of the Netherlands to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
As one of the 119 States parties to the Convention, the Netherlands must submit periodic reports on its efforts to implement the provisions of the treaty.
The Netherlands will return to the Committee at 3.30 p.m. on Friday, 12 May, to provide its answers to the questions raised this morning.
When the Committee reconvenes at 3 p.m. this afternoon, it will hear the response of the United States to questions raised by the Committee experts yesterday on its initial report. At 4:30 p.m., the Committee will present its conclusions and recommendations on the report of El Salvador.
Report of the Netherlands
The third periodic report of the Netherlands (document CAT/C/44/Add.4 and 8) contains three parts in which it enumerates the measures undertaken in the European part of the Kingdom and its overseas territories of Antilles and Aruba. The report on the European part deals with asylum and deportation in which it provides information on how refugees are hosted and the legal applications in their cases. It also discusses the procedures through which asylum-seekers should pass. It says that in 1998, there have been 4,886 aliens in detention pending deportation, in addition to 10,866 persons expelled for illegal residency without requesting asylum.
The report on the Netherlands Antilles contains information about new developments in legislation and policy, and how the provisions of the Convention are being implemented. The Government of the Netherlands Antilles decided in 1995 that torture should be made a separate offence. The criminal procedural code was also revised in 1997 to reflect the offensive nature of torture.
In its third part, the report says that while Aruba's young and advanced constitutional system contains the main legal safeguards required by the human rights conventions, other legislation gives shape to the criminal law, the law of criminal procedure and the law governing the execution of custodial sentences. The report also enumerates the reforms made in Aruba's legal system since it obtained its separate constitutional status in 1986.
Introduction of Report
PIM DUMORE, Head of the Political and Legal Division of the International Organizations Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands, said his country wanted to maintain the highest possible standards of human rights and stressed that the basic rights of every individual should be guaranteed.
Internationally, the Netherlands wanted to be in the forefront of the fight against torture and had strongly supported the work of those who tried to expose acts of torture by Governments and who spoke out in the appropriate fora against those Governments who committed those acts, Mr. Dumoré said. It also supported the work of the Special Rapporteur on Torture, who played an invaluable role in advocating on behalf of the victims of torture. The Netherlands was the highest contributor to the United Nations Voluntary Fund for the Victims of Torture.
LOUISE DE BODE-OLTON, of the Bureau for Foreign Affairs of the Netherlands Antille, said the acts of torture under article 1 of the Convention were now explicitly defined as a separate offense in the national legislation. In the course of the past years, additional efforts had been made to correct the unfavourable situation of the correctional facilities of the Netherlands Antille. However, there were still a number of shortcomings to be dealt with, some of which might be rightly criticized. Some short and mid-term measures had led to progress in a number of areas.
In October 1999, the National Institute for Police Training was established as a result of the reorganization of the police force, she said. The institute was entrusted with training of all uniformed personnel who were working within the judicial system. It was also engaged in training of prison officials to foster the proper use of force and application of criminal procedures, practical investigation and reporting skills.
HENK-COR VAN DER KWAST, from the Permanent Mission of the Netherlands to the United Nations Office at Geneva, introducing the part of the report on the Netherlands Aruba, recalled that a new code of criminal procedure for Aruba had entered into effect in October 1997 thus removing several outdated regulations governing the execution of custodial sentences that were no longer applied in practice. This greatly improved the rights of suspects. The term of ten days for detention in police cells had not been shortened under the new code, but a suspect had the right to be brought before a judge within three days of his arrest.
The delegate affirmed that the Government of Aruba was not aware of any allegations, from either persons in police custody or in prison, of severe ill-treatment or torture. The Government had adopted and would continue to adopt all the necessary measures to guarantee each citizen the basic human rights, as enshrined in its constitution and several human rights treaties with validity for Aruba.
Consideration of Report
YU MENGJIA, the Committee expert who served as rapporteur to the report of the Netherlands, wanted to know which law -- law of the Kingdom or international laws - provided better protection against torture. It seemed that there had been some certitude that the national legislation was applied in the event of conflict between the domestic and international laws.
Referring to the new regulations introduced in processing asylum requests, a change had been made in the procedures in which an asylum-seeker had to present documents or certificates which justified his demands, and if not his case would be dismissed, Mr. Yu said. He said he was concerned about the introduction of the regulation which was not in conformity with relevant provisions of international conventions in matters of refugee cases.
With regard to the report relating to the Netherlands Antilles, Mr. Yu welcomed the introduction of a number of legislative measures designed to improve prison conditions and the situation of detainees. He said that the current prison conditions were deplorable and overcrowded; the condition of sanitation should also be improved; and inter-prison violence and revolts against prison conditions had been observed, to which some measures had been taken to ease the situation. The implementation of the new penal procedure code was also worth mentioning. However, he said that the teaching of human rights was interrupted due to lack of funds.
Concerning the Netherlands Aruba, Mr. Yu said that the draft law on the deprivation of liberty which would be presented to Aruba’s parliament did not contain an explicit prohibition of torture. He asked if the Government of Aruba had envisaged to explicitly prohibit torture in that text. He also asked how the Government was intending to bring changes to prison conditions which the Committee had expressed concern about during its consideration of the second report from that Government.
FELICE GAER, the Committee expert who served as co-rapporteur to the report, said she was concerned about the policy followed by the Government of the Netherlands with regard to the indictment of criminals of war. According to the report presented by the State, about 2,156 decisions on compensation to victims of war had been applied. It was interesting to know how the decisions were made in relation to the nature of the crime committed.
Ms. Gaer also expressed certain preoccupations on the composition and functioning of the independent committee set up by the regional police in order to monitor the prison conditions and situations of pre-trial detainees. How did the members of the committee release their report on their findings? she asked. She also wanted to know about the conditions of the physical search, which was widely effected in Rotterdam in November 1999, on persons entering certain zones of the city.
Ms. Gaer also expressed concern about the treatment of prisoners in the high security cells of certain prisons. She stressed that the Government had rejected the issue referred to in the conclusions of the European Committee on the Prevention of Torture. She recalled that some years back, a prisoner who had been incarcerated in the high security cells had been killed by violence inflicted on him by another prisoner. During that incident, several prison guards were in the nearby area but it seemed that they had received instructions not to intervene because of the danger which might be incurred.
With regards to the Netherlands Antilles, Ms. Gaer said that a board had been established in 1962 to enter prisons any time and to take preventive measures. She wanted to know the success of the board in preventing torture in prisons. She asked how prisoners lodged complaints to the board. She said the inter-prisoner violence was of concern. She wanted to receive a breakdown of prison population according to ethnicity, sex, and nationality.
Ms. Gaer wished to receive more information on the preventive mechanisms, protection and investigation of acts of torture in Aruba. She also wanted to know if a case of death in custody had so far been investigated by the authorities.
Another Committee expert wanted to know why the procurator general of the Netherlands Antille did not investigate an allegation which alluded to the finding of an electric-shock device in one of the police stations. Another expert also asked the delegation about the United Nations involvement in the granting of independence to Aruba; and more information was requested on the November 1993 plebiscite in Aruba.