禁止酷刑委员会审议厄瓜多尔的报告（部分翻译）

禁止酷刑委员会今天结束审议厄瓜多尔关于落实《禁止酷刑公约》条款情况的第七次定期报告。

厄瓜多尔司法、人权和宗教部长李迪·安德莉亚·苏尼加·罗恰（Ledy Andrea Zuñiga Rocha）在呈递报告时表示，厄瓜多尔尊重并提倡所有多边人权文书。2015年12月，49处拘留中心的成年监狱人口数量达到了26421人。厄瓜多尔被认为是南美洲监狱人口最低的六个国家之一。政府在现有监禁设施的翻新和扩建方面投入了大量资源。自2013年起，法官数量大幅增加；建立了口头程序，使用了数字技术——视频听证的数量因此提升。政府的政治意愿推动了真相委员会的建立，旨在详查1984年至2008年期间和其他时期的严重人权侵犯行为。政府还成立了一个调查刑事报告的专门单位。一直以来，厄瓜多尔都在和联合国难民署就难民和寻求国际保护者的康复问题开展合作。自2009年来，厄瓜多尔已接受了六万多名难民——在拉丁美洲排名第一。

在随后的互动对话中，委员会专家提出了一些问题，分别关于司法独立、国家防范机制和公设辩护人办公室的运作、对特定非政府组织施加的压力以及对监禁设施的监测访问系统。专家们提出的其他议题包括监狱过度拥挤、狱中死亡案例、包括不驱回原则的使用在内的难民和寻求庇护者待遇、真相委员会的工作、打击有罪不罚、为酷刑受害者提供的赔偿以及习惯法和普通法的交集。专家们还提出了关于对警察培训生的虐待、紧急状态的使用、拘押中的死亡以及非法去同性恋化中心的存在。

苏尼加女士在总结发言中重申了厄瓜多尔对保护并促进所有人权的承诺。政府致力于确保国家防范机制的正常运转。

厄瓜多尔代表团包括司法、人权和宗教部、内政部、教育部、警察厅、公共卫生部、对外关系与人口流动部、司法理事会、真相委员会、议会以及厄瓜多尔常驻联合国日内瓦办事处代表团的代表们。

委员会将于11月10日（周四）下午3点举行下一次公开会议，继续审议芬兰的第七次定期报告(CAT/C/FIN/7)。
 
 
Report
 
The seventh periodic report of Ecuador can be read here: CAT/C/ECU/7. 
 
Presentation of the Report
 
LEDY ANDREA ZUÑIGA ROCHA, Minister of Justice, Human Rights and Worship of Ecuador, said that Ecuador respected and promoted all multilateral human rights instruments.  Ecuador had complied with all rulings issued by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.  In 2011, the National Prevention Mechanism had been created.  The Public Defender, as part of the Mechanism, had a dedicated budget and specialized staff.  In the first report of the Mechanism, in 2013, the adequate treatment of prisoners had been recognized.  Seven reports on detention centres had been submitted to the Ministry of Justice so far.  One of the aims was to standardize and optimize the conditions for those deprived of liberty.  In December 2015, the prison population had been made up of 26,421 adults across 49 centres.  Ecuador was considered to be among the six countries with the lowest prison population in South America.  Significant resources were being dedicated to the renovation and expansion of the existing penitentiary facilities, which had drastically reduced overcrowding.  In 2015, the rate of overcrowding had reached only 1.72 per cent.   The number of various violent attacks had decreased.  The number of persons attending formal education programmes had gone up to over 8,000. 
 
As part of the national policies on social rehabilitation, the Ministry of Health had assumed a number of powers, and significant resources had been invested in medicine and other provisions for persons in detention.  Currently 284 health professionals were working in detention centres, informed Ms. Zuñiga.   Particular measures had been taken for the vulnerable prison population, including sexual minorities.  Ecuador had opened its first school for training prison staff.  A new basic code on social rehabilitation was in place.  Another key implementation measure related to the access to justice: in a May 2011 referendum, the people of Ecuador had decided to have the Council of Judiciary established.  Since 2013, the number of judges had significantly increased; oral proceedings had been established and digital technologies harnessed – the number of video hearings had consequently increased.  Previously, many people used to be detained without being sentenced, and that number had significantly decreased now.  The crime of torture was criminalized by the Criminal Code, and could be punished by up to 16 years in prison.  The Code included all different circumstances listed in the Convention.   Sexual crimes were considered as aggravating circumstances when torture was committed.  
 
Thanks to the political will of the Government, a truth commission had been created to look into the serious human rights violations that took place between 1984 and 2008, as well as other periods.  A specialized unit had also been formed to investigate criminal reports.  A number of cases had been heard by the judiciary thus far.  With the promulgation of the law on the reparation of victims, published in 2013, a reparation programme had been put in place, and had so far dealt with 328 cases, providing reparation to 74 victims.  Moving to the issue of corporal punishment of children, Ms. Zuñiga explained that it was enshrined in the legislation as a crime.  Violence at home was unacceptable, she stressed.  The Department of Education offered courses on avoiding gender-based violence.  Ecuador had been working with the United Nations Refugee Agency on the rehabilitation of refugees and those seeking international protection.  Since 2009, Ecuador had recognized more than 60,000 refugees – the highest number in Latin America.  Members of the Committee, as well as the Subcommittee for the Prevention of Torture, were thanked and invited to visit Ecuador in person to witness the changes first-hand.  
 
Questions by Experts
 
CLAUDE HELLER, Committee Member and Co-Rapporteur for Ecuador, acknowledged a number of positive legislative steps taken by Ecuador in recent years.  The adoption of the comprehensive Criminal Code was a major development.  Ecuador had ratified a number of Optional Protocols, which was a welcome development.  It was of concern that the exercise of some rights guaranteed by legislation had been limited.   Ecuador was facing significant challenges which it ought to overcome in the coming years.  Instances of torture in different contexts had been recorded.  Sentences for those perpetrating torture seemed to be lacking.  
 
The Expert said that torture was defined as a crime by the Criminal Code.  There was no precise establishment, however, on who possible perpetrators of torture were.  In none of the articles of the Code was the issue of complicity of the person in committing a crime considered.  With regard to the attempts to commit torture, sentences provided by the Code covered between one third and two thirds of the sentences for cases in which torture had actually been committed. 
 
The need for protocols was highlighted, so that legal guarantees would be provided for persons deprived of liberty.  Thus, legal texts would be implemented on the ground in a more smooth and consolidated manner.
 
The delegation was asked to provide details about the activities of the Public Defender’s Office since 2014.  His office had seen the number of personnel significantly increased.  The Office and activities it provided should, nonetheless, be given further visibility. According to various documents, the human resources of the National Preventive Mechanism seemed to be rather limited.  It was very important that visibility be given to the work of the Mechanism, reiterated Mr. Heller. 
 
The Expert asked for additional information on the follow-up to the reports of visits to penitentiaries.  What exactly had been done once deficiencies had been reported?  Was it true that the Ministry of Justice had to give its accord to other institutions before they could visit places of detention?  
 
Why had the draft organic law on the prior consultation of indigenous persons not been approved, and what was its current status in Parliament?    
 
A question was asked about the tenure of judges in Ecuador and the independence of the judiciary.  Disciplinary measures against judges were reportedly used on a regular basis, which was worrisome.  Harsh measures were also reported against members of the opposition and critics of the Government.    There were worries about the possibilities of censorship, noted the Expert.  
 
On the right to request refugee status, the Expert said that there were many allegations with regard to deportations and the lack of protection for asylum seekers, who often found themselves in a legal limbo.  It also appeared that in some cases, the principle of non-refoulement had been violated.  Various reports highlighted that opening borders to migrants had led to the hardening of the Government’s policy in that area.  
 
Ecuador’s torture legislation distinguished between nationals and foreigners. It would be good to receive more information on the breakdown of cases between the two categories.  
 
The work of the Truth Commission was very valuable, said the Expert, but some organizations had noted that the progress in a number of cases had been very slow.  Very few cases had actually been concluded.  A number of cases seemed to have been documented, but not investigated, let alone resolved.  
 
While significant progress had been made, there was still concern about the power of the State to dissolve certain non-governmental organizations.  In 2015, for example, an attempted dissolution of the organization Fundamedios had provoked an international outrage. 
 
What was the delegation’s position on the detention of those involved in the 2010 demonstrations? 
 
A question was asked about the high rate of reported cases of torture in one single province of Guayas.  
 
How about the crimes of terrorism – were they older or more recent? 
 
JENS MODVIG, Committee Member and Co-Rapporteur for Ecuador, brought up the issue of the training of military, police and judicial personnel on the issues of torture.  The State party reported seven different human rights training activities, but there was no specific mention of the Convention against Torture.  Were police and judicial officers familiar with its provisions?  Was the prohibition of torture included in the instructions issued to police officers, asked Mr. Modvig.
 
Regarding the training of judges, public prosecutors, and forensic and medical staff, the initiatives mentioned in the report were rather vague, the Expert noted.  To which degree were medical doctors involved with detainees trained on the provisions of the Istanbul Protocol?  The knowledge on how to identify and document torture ought to be more available.  
 
The incarceration rate in Ecuador seemed to have increased in recent years – what was the reason for that?  The delegation was asked to provide updated numbers on theovercrowding in the country’s prisons.  A question was asked on the policy on criminal sanctions.  New prisons were being built, while the overall conditions did not improve.  Medical access was reportedly poor and insufficient, while visitors were strip-searched.  
 
The reform of the prison services was reportedly in progress, which was positive.  What were the structures and facilities emerging from the ongoing efforts?
 
More information was sought on deaths in custody, desegregated if possible.  Who examined the bodies, and were the procedures of the Minnesota Protocol followed?  The question on the frequency of interprisoner violence had not been fully answered.  What preventive measures had the State party taken?  More information was also asked about the “quiet areas” to which prisoners were sent for up to 48 hours in order to reflect.
 
The Committee had information that complainants were frequently discouraged or dissuaded from filing a complaint.  Could the delegation comment? 
 
Turning to the issue of combatting impunity, Mr. Modvig asked about measures taken by the State party on the prosecution of more than 160 cases between 1984 and 2008.  How about reparations?  Could closer cooperation with civil society help in that regard?
 
The Committee wanted to hear about measures taken to establish an independent body to look into complaints on acts of torture committed by State officials.  The funding for the witness protection programme was reported to have increased significantly. How many victims of torture had actually received protection from that programme? 
 
The issue of sexual violence in educational institutions was brought up, and the delegation was asked to provide statistics on such cases, and what had happened as a result of those complaints.  
 
As for the issue of alleged mob justice, which the State did not consider a specific crime, the Committee requested information on steps taken to investigate such acts and bring the perpetrators to trial.  Did Ecuador acknowledge it as a problem?
 
There were seven centres in which “sexual reorientation therapies” were provided.  Had any proceedings been initiated against institutions that provided involuntary drug treatments?  The delegation was asked to provide information on steps taken to bring an end to any “conversion” therapies. 
 
Information was requested on the number of victims of torture, and members of their families, who had received reparations from the State.  
 
The State party did not provide any examples of dismissed cases because evidence had been obtained through torture.  Had there been any such cases, asked the Expert. 
 
A question was asked on whether beating, kicking or hitting family members was permitted, if it did not lead to an exact injury.
 
He asked whether the delegation had viewed the video of an alleged abuse of prisoners in one detention centre, and what its commentary was. 
 
Another Expert inquired about the kind of problems identified by the Ombudsman’s Office during its visits to detention facilities.  
 
Holders of temporary asylum seeker certificates could not be extradited while a decision was pending on their application, unless their presence was considered a threat to the national security, according to Ecuadorian legislation.  The Expert stressed that in that regard the Convention against Torture went beyond the Refugee Convention, and wanted to know how Ecuador reconciled the principle of non-refoulement with the former Convention.  He also wanted to know more about diplomatic assurances.
 
The delegation was asked to explain about specific training provided to the military personnel deployed on the Ecuadorian-Colombian border.  
 
Overcrowding in prisons still seemed to exist, noted the Expert.  How come there was room for more prisoners in some prisons, but at the same time there was overcrowding in others?
 
Another Expert inquired whether the state of emergency was still in effect in certain regions of the country.  Were the right to life and other non-derrogable rights still respected there? 
 
She also asked about the relationship between indigenous justice and ordinary justice, and what the level of cooperation was.  
 
A question was raised about the sexual exploitation of migrant children in certain regions.  Did such exploitation of vulnerable and street children exist?
 
Ecuador was reported to have high levels of violence against women, including sexual violence.  Ecuador’s Criminal Code prohibited abortion, with three exceptions; even abortion after rape was criminalized.   The delegation was asked to provide further explanations in that regard.
 
An Expert stressed that there was no good response from the State party on the issue of sexual violence in schools run by the State.  There was cooperation with the Prosecutor General’s Office, but not much was said on the prosecutions.  Would the delegation have information to furnish in that regard?  Prosecutorial staff were said to be discouraging victims from reporting such cases.  Some prominent cases seemed to remain unpunished, said the Expert, who asked why Ecuador had not attended the October 2015 discussion at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.   An update was requested on those cases.  What was being done to combat impunity?
 
A question was asked about the issue of so-called “purification” – a sort of flogging, followed by cold water washing, performed in local justice ceremonies.    Why would cases of corporal punishment and rape go to ordinary courts?  An explanation was sought on cases when local and indigenous justice was given a prerogative.
 
Another Expert inquired about countries of origin of those who were granted asylum, but those unsuccessful applicants as well.  To which countries were refugee seekers sent back?  More information was requested on the number of appeals upheld and rejected. 
 
There was no robust legal basis for offering legal certainty for the operation of the National Preventive Mechanism.  What was the State party planning to do in that regard, asked an Expert.  The autonomy of the Mechanism needed to be enshrined in law, he stressed.  The budget for the Mechanism was reportedly rather scant – what was Ecuador planning to do to address those concerns? 
 
Was the Government considering granting to the civil society responsibilities in monitoring detention facilities?
 
The case was brought up of the refoulement of 100 Cuban asylum seekers, which was in violation of the Convention.  Clarification was sought.
 
On transitional justice, what was being done to ensure that Article 14 of the Convention was being respected, asked the Expert.  
 
A number of accounts of corporal punishment had been received by the Committee, and the delegation was asked to shed further light on the measures taken to prosecute the perpetrators.   Clandestine rehabilitation centres, in which “dehomosexualization” was practiced, were a worrisome phenomenon.  What was the Government doing to prevent such illicit centres practicing torture?
 
International non-governmental organizations had reported that there was a secret police force, called SIC 10, used as a method of oppression.   The delegation was asked to comment.   
 
Did the delegation have a concrete example of a perpetrator prosecuted and found guilt for torture under the new Criminal Code?  If so, what was the penalty imposed by the judiciary? 
 
Replies by the Delegation
 
The delegation said that the crime of torture was covered by Article 151 of the Criminal Code.  Under the text, elements were established to ensure that the Convention was applied.  Torture could lead to five to seven years in prison.  Public officials and other persons were all covered by the crime of torture, but sentences for public officials were harsher.  The Constitution and the national legislation did not provide for any circumstances which would legitimize the crime of torture.  Sexual crimes were considered aggravated when committed alongside torture.
 
The Criminal Code determined violence as any action consisting of ill-treatment, psychological or physical.  It was not only physical violence that was prosecuted, stressed a delegate.
 
Turning to the issue of violence in education centres, it was explained that there was an agreement between the General Prosecutor and other actors on how to deal with violence in schools.   Separation from service was often the very first measure taken.  All members of the education community were obliged to report such cases, and not reporting them was a crime on its own.  Sexual violence, as any other kind of violence, was sanctioned in Ecuador.  Psychologists and medical workers worked in schools to deal with any reported cases of sexual violence, and all efforts were made to ensure that proceedings were swift.  
 
Ecuador recognized the right of people to migrate, and guaranteed the protection of migrants.  The State party had already provided responses regarding the case of theCuban migrants, who had not requested refugee status, but had only wanted to reach their final destination – the United States.  In every stage, the Ecuadorian State had respected the rights of the Cuban citizens.  There had been no cruel, discriminatory treatment or torture.  Each case of deportation had been dealt with individually.  The Embassy of Cuba had confirmed that those citizens had left the country freely and had the right to return if they so wished.  The Committee was informed that as many as 260,000 refugees and asylum seekers lived in Ecuador, which was recognized as a regional leader in that regard.     
 
Replies by the Delegation
 
The delegation informed that there were no impediments in Ecuador for the national preventive mechanism to visit places of detention.  Directives had been issued to all directors of penitentiary centres informing them of the obligation to facilitate such visits.  Organizations working with persons deprived of their liberty were also given the right to visit prisons, within clear protocols built with the cooperation of civil society.  Relevant information on the mechanism was published on the web platform SIDERECHOS. 
 
The Public Defender’s Office was a strategic component which had a function of fulfilling the recommendations of the mechanism.  In 2015, its budget had been over $ 45 million.  The Public Defender’s service was in place in order to allow for full access to justice.  It was an independent legal body, set up as a unique body with a constitutional status. 
 
On the reparation process, the delegation explained that there was a political will to create the Truth Commission.  An exclusive law was in place to provide for reparations to victims, which was coordinated by the Public Defender’s Office.  There was a department for the reparation of victims, which had started to provide reparations in February 2015.  Children of victims, for example, were provided with inclusive education, with their special needs taken care of.  The Ministry of Justice had also carried out both material and other reparations.  A whole process of dialogue with victims had taken place to establish criteria on reparations; agreements on amounts had been reached with a number of victims; one flat fee could not be established.
 
Dehomosexualization clinics were not included nor recognized in Ecuador’s health system.  Any “reorientation activities” of sexual orientation were prohibited and punishable.  Between 2013 and 2015, hundreds of visits had been conducted to clinics, with the view of reducing their clandestine activities.
 
No kind of violence against women was permitted in Ecuador, stressed the head of the delegation.  The National Plan for the Eradication of Gender-Based Violence against Children, Adolescents and Women had been set up in 2014 and had a related 2015-2017 action plan.  The State was committed to eradicating gender-based violence in its entirety, and organizations of civil society were cooperating with the authorities in that regard.  There were various groups providing lawyers to the victims of violence; the number of shelters had been extended.  
 
Regarding training of the security organs, it was important to highlight that in the Constitution their task was to protect the rights of citizens.  The vision of police repression had changed in Ecuador in recent years, and the police today were closer to the citizens, whom they served through community police services across the country.  
 
On the issue of social rehabilitation, it was explained that the response of the State to crimes had to include the construction of new prisons.  With overcrowded prisons, there had been no possibility for social rehabilitation.  The overcrowding rate in prisons had been reduced in recent years with the creation of new penitentiary centres.  There were some persons who were not in detention centres close to their cities.  The rate of recidivism had been reduced, while some illiterate prisoners had ended up leaving prisons with university degrees.  Degree-level qualifications were offered in the field of rehabilitation of prisoners.  There was no possibility to issue humanitarian and alternative sentences.  Over 3,000 prisoners could be released thanks to the application of the new Criminal Code in Ecuador.
 
It was important to stress that the Penitentiary Management Model did not provide for isolation, but efforts had to be undertaken to ensure that persons causing any violations of the rights of other detained persons were separated, always in accordance with the law.
 
The Ministry of Health was in charge of assessing the health of detainees.  The videos of the abuse of prisoners were the result of the camera surveillance system established in prisons, which allowed for the perpetrators to be brought to justice.  In one case, the protocol in place had been violated, which was why the police officer would be prosecuted.  The judge had established that the State was not responsible, but it was rather an individual responsibility.   A public apology had been issued to the victim.  
 
In line with the Constitution of Ecuador, after two centuries of its existence, the National Assembly had established a comprehensive Criminal Code in the country.  That Code had brought together all crimes which had been previously omitted.  Pursuant to the recommendations issued by the Committee, Ecuador now included the crime of torture in the Code.  Any individual could be a victim of torture; if such a crime was committed by a public official, then that was deemed an aggravating factor.  Ecuador’s aim was to hand down sanctions for any crimes of torture, regardless of who was responsible for it.  If the perpetrator was a public official, the punishment would be more severe.  The sentence for the crime of torture ranged from seven to 13 years of imprisonment, the latter being the maximum sentence applicable to public officials. 
 
Crimes against persons with disabilities, elderly persons, minors and pregnant women fell under a special category.  The most serious crimes in the Criminal Code were those against humanity; on the other end of the spectrum were minor infractions.  Sentences were established for crimes against humanity, human trafficking, exploitation of persons, etc.  The Ecuadorian legislation thus categorized not only the crime of torture, but all other crimes which might not be torture as such.  
 
In the prison system there were currently no political prisoners, informed the delegation.
 
Efforts had been made in recent years to bolster the independence of the judiciary in Ecuador.  One of the obstacles was the flimsy system for selecting judges, and, in many cases, the ability to assess their skills.  Any judge in Ecuador had to go through the meritocratic process and had his competencies established and checked.  Any citizen could lodge a complaint against any judge if it was felt that they had not acted in a professional manner.  Now, 100 percent of national judges had gone through competitive exams, which was a sign of the fairness of the system.  Every individual working as a judge had a permanent contract, while service contracts were applied only to administrative personnel.  
 
Concerning new practices, the Council of the Judiciary had carried out a number of competitive examinations, which allowed broad classes of citizens to apply for and acquire positions in the judiciary.  There were more than 2,000 judges in Ecuador now.  The Constitution of Ecuador stated that no public official was exempt from their responsibilities for whatever reason.  Any administrative, criminal or civil proceeding could thus be brought against them, and there was no immunity.  Public officials were subject to certain obligations and prohibitions, explained a delegate.  The maximum possible administrative fine was dismissal; in 2016, the number of judges dismissed stood at 12, out of 2,015 judges in office. 
 
The delegation said that there were no political prisoners in Ecuador.  In addition, regarding the cases of two human rights defenders – it was explained that those had been suspended.  The persons in question had been found to be innocent.  
 
Members of the Armed Forces and the police were tried under ordinary justice, the delegation informed.  Within their territorial remit, local authorities could apply their own procedures to resolve disputes in a manner not contrary to the Constitution.  Thus, two justice systems – ordinary and customary – could exist without conflict.
 
The national police of Ecuador operated on the basis of several pillars, including prevention and investigation.  There was no unit for secret investigations.  There were specialized units for crimes such as kidnappings.  In 2008, the structure of the police forces had been changed, recognizing the primacy of citizen security.  The objective was to achieve citizen security and public order.  Human rights were cross-cutting in the training of new police officers, including human rights topics and prevention of torture and in-service, continuous training programmes.  A large majority of police officers had undergone training.  There were more than 250 trainers of trainers for human rights courses.  Attention was paid to the use of force, the rights of persons deprived of their liberty, the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons, etc.  A handbook for procedures had been developed in order to ensure a unified approach across the board.  Ecuador had also trained trainers from a number of other countries from Latin America.   The International Committee of the Red Cross had signed an agreement with the Armed Forces to train them in human rights and humanitarian matters.  
 
In 2008, the Constitution provided for the use of dissuasive measures as opposed to the use of force.  In 2014, the standards on the use of force had been improved, and more precise guidelines had been put in place.  Also in 2014, the first handbook for law enforcement forces had been adopted, the delegation said.  In 2015, three human rights courses in peacekeeping and public order maintenance had been organized with the Red Cross.  
 
The organic Law on Communications provided for the monitoring of the media and ensured an effective right to information.  The system established an equitable distribution of frequencies through public competition.  The law also provided for the professionalization of communicators.  Freedom of the press was considered a key freedom.  
 
With regard to the right to assembly, it was explained that the organic Law on Citizens’ Participation helped organize a full database of all civil society organizations.  There were no restrictions on the freedom of assembly, which was a right respected in line with the international treaties to which Ecuador was a party.  In Ecuador, peaceful protest was by no means criminalized, the delegation stressed.
 
The delegation provided an example of a public apology and compensation paid to a victim of torture. 
 
In 2014, the prison overcrowding rate had been significantly reduced, stated the delegation.  There used to be high levels of insecurity and impunity, with very high murder rates, which was no longer the case.  Now, following a judicial reform, there was a more efficient system which ensured security and safety for citizens of Ecuador.
 
In 2012, the Prosecutor’s Office had created a specialized unit for investigating criminal cases reported by the Truth Commission.  In October 2013, for the first time in the legal history of Ecuador, a case of a crime against humanity had been brought forward.  When the Prosecutor’s Office had begun that line of work, a number of exemplary judges had been selected and trained intensively for a year, and then subsequently re-trained periodically.  In the case of Jose Luis Lema, prison sentences had been secured for six police officers, and not only one, as had been alleged by the Committee.  Another case, against 14 State agents, had also been brought forward.  The delegation added that an individual had been tried and sentenced for racial hatred.  Those were all pioneering cases in Ecuadorian legal history.  
 
Victim protection was provided for by a set of relevant guidelines, and in line with international provisions.  The system was governed by the principles of accessibility and effectiveness, among others.  Interdisciplinary teams included lawyers, psychologists and police officers.   
 
Follow-up Questions
 
Concerning the definition of the crime of torture, the Committee felt that it was very important to stress that the Convention against Torture assigned responsibilities first and foremost to the State.  
 
The information received from the national preventive mechanism indicated that they had been refused entry to penitentiaries on certain occasions; thus, they did not enjoy unrestricted access. 
 
It would be useful to have a table with the statistics on the cases dealt with by the Inter-American Court for Human Rights.  Numbers related to the pending cases would be welcome.  
 
Another pertinent issue referred to the Truth Commission, the information on which should have been included in the State party’s report.
 
The Committee awaited details on the mistreatment of police trainees, and what was being done in that respect. 
 
The incarceration rate had increased in the last six years, which was partly explained by more justice being carried out by the State institutions. 
 
As for the deatsh in custody, the Expert inquired about the total number of deaths in custody, and not only homicides. 
 
Was there a plan to have an independent body review all videos of abuse and torture in prisons?
 
Another Expert reiterated her question on whether the state of emergency continued to be applied or not. 
 
The case of a 12-year old girl raped by a 74-year school principal had led to a 20-year sentence for the perpetrator, said an Expert.  The worry in that case was that there seemed to have been reprisals against the victim and her family.  Could the delegation comment on that?  The trial process itself had led to the re-victimization of the girl. 
 
Why had the State party not participated in the October hearing in the case of Paola Guzman at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the Expert inquired?
 
Mob justice was a problem in the indigenous communities.  Had there been any developments in recent years? 
 
An Expert noted a very high number of complaints being lodged against judges and wondered whether that represented a form of intimidation. 
 
It was good that the practice of dehomosexualization was illegal, but did the Government had any statistics in that regard?  How many clinics had been closed and how many were still operating illegally? 
 
The issue of abortion was again brought up by another Expert, who wanted to know whether there were any initiatives to amend the Criminal Code to allow access to safe abortion.  
 
Replies by the Delegation
 
The delegation said that the budget for the national preventive mechanism was over $ 280,000 in 2016.  
 
In certain detention centres there were clinics capable of performing smaller surgeries. Psychological services and general practitioner services were also offered, in addition to drug addiction support.
 
To date, 24 dehomosexualization clinics had been closed for good; out of those, six cases had been brought before the Prosecutor.
 
The delegation stressed that in all cases related to previous administrations, Ecuador had complied with the Inter-American Court’s rulings.
 
The Parliament in place was working on a wide array of bills, said a delegate.  Previously, there had been a great lack of legal certainty; however, there was streamlining of processes now.  Legal proceedings now took at most three years.  
 
In Ecuador, in the judiciary there was a system of social monitoring by which any citizen could present a complaint if events justified their case.  Procedures for admissibility were in place, which laid out prerequisites for submitting cases.  The percentage of judgments of inexcusable error was quite low compared to the total number of cases submitted; innocence was the most common conclusion reached.  There was also a right to appeal.
 
Regarding the Paola Guzman case, it was explained that the Inter-American Human Rights Commission had never formally informed the Ecuadorian State about the hearing; Ecuador had never failed to attend a hearing of which it had been informed.  
 
Out of the 165 cases mentioned in the Truth Commission report, eight victims and witnesses were under the protection scheme. 
 
The President could declare a state of emergency on the whole or a part of the territory under strictly defined conditions, such as natural disasters, but under no circumstances could the right to life be derogated or torture practiced.
 
Indigenous techniques were recognized in the medical system, said the delegation.  There were no statistics on the Roma population in Ecuador, but it was known that it was very small. 
 
The 2014 Criminal Code established 43 protective measures for victims of sexual violence.  Hearings were closed, and prosecutors always had to investigate.  In line with the Constitution, pregnancy was protected from the moment of conception, explained a delegate referring to abortion. 
 
Concluding Remarks
 
LEDY ANDREA ZUÑIGA ROCHA, Minister of Justice, Human Rights and Worship of Ecuador, thanked the representatives of the three branches of the Ecuadorian State.  She also thanked representatives of civil society for their contributions and Committee Members for their interest and support.  Ecuador’s commitment to the protection and promotion of all human rights was reiterated.  The Government was committed to ensuring that the national preventive mechanism functioned properly.  The SIDERECHOS platform was very innovative and would continue to be developed.  The delegation would provide further information in writing.