Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Press releases Treaty bodies
Default title
02 May 2000
Share
CAT
24th Session
2 May 2000
Morning
The Committee against Torture this morning started its consideration of a third periodic report of Poland, saying that the country's legal system still lacked a precise definition of torture in the meaning stated under the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
Introducing the report, Tomasz Knothe, Minister-Counsellor at the Permanent Mission of Poland to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said that an intensive process of significant social and legal reforms had taken place in the country in the past few years. A new Constitution had been adopted in 1996; a new criminal code had entered into force in September 1998; and the rights and freedoms of citizens were now effectively guaranteed and the mechanisms to ensure their protection had been considerably strengthened.
Sayed Kassem El Masry, the Committee expert who served as rapporteur to the report of Poland, underlined that the direct application of the definition of torture under Article 1 of the Convention was not satisfactory by itself, a definition of it should be incorporated within the domestic law of the country.
Other Committee experts, including the co-rapporteur to the report of Poland, Alexander M. Yakovlev, emphasized the need to incorporate the definition of torture in the Polish legal system.
The Polish delegation also included Joanna Janiszewska, Expert of the Ministry of Justice; Andrzej Przemyski and Waldemar Sledzik, Experts; and Krystyna Zurek and Agnieszka Wyznikiewicz from the Permanent Mission of Poland.
As a State party to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Poland is obligated to present periodic reports on the Government’s efforts to prevent acts of torture and to punish its perpetrators.
When the Committee reconvenes at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 3 May, it will start its consideration of Portugal's third periodic report. The Committee will continue its review of the report of Poland at 3 p.m. tomorrow.
Report of Poland
The third periodic report of Poland (document CAT/C/44/Add.5) enumerates the juridical and legislative measures taken by the Government since the second report was considered by the Committee. It also focuses on the constitutional provisions which aim at preventing torture and other degrading punishment. The separate role played by each state power is also explained in the report with particular reference to the administration of justice which is carried out by the Supreme Court, the common courts of law, administrative courts and military courts.
The report emphasized the importance of the new Constitution which guarantees the human rights of all its citizens, including the rights of persons deprived of liberty. The report also describes the manner in which the rights of prisoners are respected, the rights of persons under pre-trial detention, and the way police investigations are carried out.
Introduction of Report
TOMASZ KNOTHE, Minister-Counsellor of the Permanent Mission of Poland to the United Nations Office at Geneva, introduced the report and recalled that an intensive process of significant social and legal reforms had taken place in the country in the past few years. A new Constitution had been adopted in 1996; and a new criminal code had entered into force in September 1998.
Mr, Knothe stressed that under the new fundamental law, the rights and freedoms of citizens were now effectively guaranteed and the mechanisms to ensure their protection had been considerably strengthened. The acceptance of international instruments as sources of internal law was one of the most important changes which were undertaken in recent years.
The individual rights that were guaranteed by the Constitution included the right not to be subjected to torture, Mr. Knothe continued to say. A person deprived of liberty by any means other than the decision of a court of law had the right to challenge that measure before the courts. In addition, the new penal code established criminal responsibility for any act of cruelty inflicted on persons deprived of their liberty and for the State officials that employed violence.
Discussion
SAYED KASSEM EL MASRY, the Committee expert who served as rapporteur to the report of Poland, said that the report was marked by the intensive legislative and administrative reform that had taken place in the country in the last few years. He recalled the Committee had already recommended that Poland enact a separate legal instrument against torture other than the direct application of article 1 of the Convention. The direct application of the article was not satisfactory in the view of the Committee. Its incorporation within the domestic legal system and the express prohibition of acts of torture in the meaning of the Convention was primordial.
The report explained that not all the international agreements had a self-executing character but the majority of the provisions of the Convention against Torture were of a self-executing character, including Article 1 regarding definition of torture. During the discussion of the second period report, Committee members had emphasized that the sanctions laid down by the Polish legislature should be based on a definition that was comprehensive and well thought of.
The report exhausted the list of optional grounds for the refusal of extradition in its paragraph 41, but torture was not among the listed cases. According to the report, from 1994 to 1997, Poland had extradited 58 persons to requesting States, whereas in six cases such proceedings were refused. Which countries demanded the extraditions? What were the reasons for the refusal?
The question of the responsibility of an officer who carried out the orders of the superior officer was mentioned in the report. In its previous recommendations, the Committee had expressed its concern that obedience to a legitimate hierarchical authority was deemed an element of a nature to be invoked in justification of the perpetration of an act of torture. The present report declared that the new penal code did not introduce any substantial changes in that matter. The criminal responsibility of the recipient of an order was based on his awareness of the criminal nature of the order.
ALEXANDER M. YAKOVLEV, the Committee expert who served as co-rapporteur to the report of Poland, said the report was submitted in due time and contained valuable information. The distinction made by the Government in the consideration of torture might prompt a discussion. The report indicated that the broad coverage of the Polish law of persons subjected to penalty for causing severe pain to the injured person marked the main difference between the Polish legislation and the provisions of the Convention, since the Convention considered torture to be only actions of public officials. Since the State was responsible to punish all crimes of torture, the Convention did not make any distinction among the perpetrators.
Other Committee members also commented on the contents of the report. An expert thanked the Government for its timely submission of the report and observed that the country had gone through tremendous changes to transform itself from an authoritarian regime to democracy. The need for the definition of torture and its entrenchment under the domestic legal system was underlined by the expert. Referring to the European Convention against Torture, to which reference was made in the Polish report, the expert stressed that only the International Convention against Torture contained mechanisms applicable in all circumstances.
The issue of the handling of female detainees was raised followed by questions on the conditions in which they were incarcerated and the care provided to prevent sexual violence by intruders or prison officials. The delegation was asked to provide cases of repression against perpetrators relating to violence against female detainees.
* *** *
24th Session
2 May 2000
Morning
The Committee against Torture this morning started its consideration of a third periodic report of Poland, saying that the country's legal system still lacked a precise definition of torture in the meaning stated under the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
Introducing the report, Tomasz Knothe, Minister-Counsellor at the Permanent Mission of Poland to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said that an intensive process of significant social and legal reforms had taken place in the country in the past few years. A new Constitution had been adopted in 1996; a new criminal code had entered into force in September 1998; and the rights and freedoms of citizens were now effectively guaranteed and the mechanisms to ensure their protection had been considerably strengthened.
Sayed Kassem El Masry, the Committee expert who served as rapporteur to the report of Poland, underlined that the direct application of the definition of torture under Article 1 of the Convention was not satisfactory by itself, a definition of it should be incorporated within the domestic law of the country.
Other Committee experts, including the co-rapporteur to the report of Poland, Alexander M. Yakovlev, emphasized the need to incorporate the definition of torture in the Polish legal system.
The Polish delegation also included Joanna Janiszewska, Expert of the Ministry of Justice; Andrzej Przemyski and Waldemar Sledzik, Experts; and Krystyna Zurek and Agnieszka Wyznikiewicz from the Permanent Mission of Poland.
As a State party to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Poland is obligated to present periodic reports on the Government’s efforts to prevent acts of torture and to punish its perpetrators.
When the Committee reconvenes at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 3 May, it will start its consideration of Portugal's third periodic report. The Committee will continue its review of the report of Poland at 3 p.m. tomorrow.
Report of Poland
The third periodic report of Poland (document CAT/C/44/Add.5) enumerates the juridical and legislative measures taken by the Government since the second report was considered by the Committee. It also focuses on the constitutional provisions which aim at preventing torture and other degrading punishment. The separate role played by each state power is also explained in the report with particular reference to the administration of justice which is carried out by the Supreme Court, the common courts of law, administrative courts and military courts.
The report emphasized the importance of the new Constitution which guarantees the human rights of all its citizens, including the rights of persons deprived of liberty. The report also describes the manner in which the rights of prisoners are respected, the rights of persons under pre-trial detention, and the way police investigations are carried out.
Introduction of Report
TOMASZ KNOTHE, Minister-Counsellor of the Permanent Mission of Poland to the United Nations Office at Geneva, introduced the report and recalled that an intensive process of significant social and legal reforms had taken place in the country in the past few years. A new Constitution had been adopted in 1996; and a new criminal code had entered into force in September 1998.
Mr, Knothe stressed that under the new fundamental law, the rights and freedoms of citizens were now effectively guaranteed and the mechanisms to ensure their protection had been considerably strengthened. The acceptance of international instruments as sources of internal law was one of the most important changes which were undertaken in recent years.
The individual rights that were guaranteed by the Constitution included the right not to be subjected to torture, Mr. Knothe continued to say. A person deprived of liberty by any means other than the decision of a court of law had the right to challenge that measure before the courts. In addition, the new penal code established criminal responsibility for any act of cruelty inflicted on persons deprived of their liberty and for the State officials that employed violence.
Discussion
SAYED KASSEM EL MASRY, the Committee expert who served as rapporteur to the report of Poland, said that the report was marked by the intensive legislative and administrative reform that had taken place in the country in the last few years. He recalled the Committee had already recommended that Poland enact a separate legal instrument against torture other than the direct application of article 1 of the Convention. The direct application of the article was not satisfactory in the view of the Committee. Its incorporation within the domestic legal system and the express prohibition of acts of torture in the meaning of the Convention was primordial.
The report explained that not all the international agreements had a self-executing character but the majority of the provisions of the Convention against Torture were of a self-executing character, including Article 1 regarding definition of torture. During the discussion of the second period report, Committee members had emphasized that the sanctions laid down by the Polish legislature should be based on a definition that was comprehensive and well thought of.
The report exhausted the list of optional grounds for the refusal of extradition in its paragraph 41, but torture was not among the listed cases. According to the report, from 1994 to 1997, Poland had extradited 58 persons to requesting States, whereas in six cases such proceedings were refused. Which countries demanded the extraditions? What were the reasons for the refusal?
The question of the responsibility of an officer who carried out the orders of the superior officer was mentioned in the report. In its previous recommendations, the Committee had expressed its concern that obedience to a legitimate hierarchical authority was deemed an element of a nature to be invoked in justification of the perpetration of an act of torture. The present report declared that the new penal code did not introduce any substantial changes in that matter. The criminal responsibility of the recipient of an order was based on his awareness of the criminal nature of the order.
ALEXANDER M. YAKOVLEV, the Committee expert who served as co-rapporteur to the report of Poland, said the report was submitted in due time and contained valuable information. The distinction made by the Government in the consideration of torture might prompt a discussion. The report indicated that the broad coverage of the Polish law of persons subjected to penalty for causing severe pain to the injured person marked the main difference between the Polish legislation and the provisions of the Convention, since the Convention considered torture to be only actions of public officials. Since the State was responsible to punish all crimes of torture, the Convention did not make any distinction among the perpetrators.
Other Committee members also commented on the contents of the report. An expert thanked the Government for its timely submission of the report and observed that the country had gone through tremendous changes to transform itself from an authoritarian regime to democracy. The need for the definition of torture and its entrenchment under the domestic legal system was underlined by the expert. Referring to the European Convention against Torture, to which reference was made in the Polish report, the expert stressed that only the International Convention against Torture contained mechanisms applicable in all circumstances.
The issue of the handling of female detainees was raised followed by questions on the conditions in which they were incarcerated and the care provided to prevent sexual violence by intruders or prison officials. The delegation was asked to provide cases of repression against perpetrators relating to violence against female detainees.
* *** *