COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE CONCLUDES THIRTIETH SESSION

CAT
30th session
16 May 2003





Considered Reports of Cambodia, Azerbaijan,
Iceland, Turkey, Slovenia Belgium and Moldova



The Committee against Torture concluded today a three-week spring session during which it reviewed reports of Cambodia, Azerbaijan, Iceland, Turkey, Slovenia, Belgium and Moldova. Those countries are among 133 States parties to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and are bound by the terms of the treaty to submit periodic reports on efforts to ensure that such human rights violations do not occur on their territories.
In addition to submitting the reports, the countries sent delegations before the panel of 10 independent experts to answer questions.
The Committee’s conclusions and recommendations on an initial report of Cambodia were provisional because – as the Committee noted with regret – a Government delegation had not been present to introduce the report and to answer questions from Committee Experts. The Committee requested the Cambodian Government to provide responses to the questions asked by its members orally and to the issues raised in the provisional conclusions and recommendations by 31 August 2003.
The Committee cited among positive aspects to the Cambodian report the Government's willingness to continue undertaking legal reforms in order to fulfil its international obligations in the field of human rights; and its cooperation with United Nations agencies and mechanisms in the field of human rights. It expressed concern, among other things, over numerous, ongoing and consistent allegations of acts of torture and other ill-treatment in police stations and prisons; and extended impunity for past and present violations of human rights committed by law-enforcement officials and members of the armed forces. The panel recommended, among other things, that Cambodia take effective measures to establish a fully independent and professional judiciary; that it ensure prompt, impartial and full investigations into many allegations of torture; and that it establish an independent body to deal with complaints against the police and other law-enforcement personnel.
The Committee said among positive developments in a second periodic report of Azerbaijan were extensive legal and legislative reforms carried out; and the introduction of the offense of torture into the country‘s new Criminal Code. Concern was cited, among other things, about numerous ongoing allegations of torture and ill-treatment and reports that some persons had been held in police custody much beyond the time limit of 48 hours established in the Code of Criminal Procedure, and that in exceptional circumstances, persons could be held up to 10 days in temporary detention in local police facilities. The Committee recommended, among other things, that Azerbaijan guarantee in practice that persons could not be held in initial preventive detention (police custody) beyond 48 hours; that it transfer the remand centre of the Ministry of National Security to the authority of the Ministry of Justice or discontinue its use; and that it ensure the full protection of non-governmental human rights defenders and organizations.
The Committee noted in relation to a second periodic report of Iceland that it had not received any complaints of torture or other maltreatment in the country and citing among other positive matters new legislative Acts on children and foreigners that offered greater protection. The Committee expressed concern about the lack of a precise prohibition of the use as evidence in court of any statement established to have been made as a result of torture, and about inter-prisoner violence. It recommended, among other things, that torture be defined as a specific offense in Icelandic law; that inter-prisoner violence be monitored and that prison staff be trained to intervene appropriately; and that doctors having contact with persons subjected to any form of arrest, detention or imprisonment be trained in the field of prohibition of torture.
Cited among positive developments of the second periodic report of Turkey were the lifting of the long-standing state of emergency in the country and the inclusion in domestic legislation of the principle that evidence obtained through torture should not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings. The Committee expressed concern about numerous and consistent allegations that torture and other ill-treatment of detainees held in police custody were apparently still widespread in Turkey, and about allegations that prosecution and punishment of members of security forces for such offenses were rare. Among the panel's recommendations were that Turkey ensure that safeguards against torture be available in practice, particularly the right of detainees to medical and legal assistance and to contact with their families; that Turkey guarantee that prompt, impartial and full investigations into numerous allegations of torture and ill-treatment were carried out and that it ensure an efficient and transparent complaints system in this connection; and that it expedite the trials of public officials indicted for such acts.
The Committee said positive developments in the second periodic report of Slovenia included a decision of the Supreme Court in 2000 limiting the duration of remand in custody to two years; and amendments to the Aliens Act and Asylum Act bringing domestic legislation into conformity with article 3 of the Convention against Torture. Among matters of concern, the Committee noted the lack of an independent system to investigate complaints and continuing allegations of excessive use of force by the police, many of which concerned members of ethnic minorities. The Committee recommended, among other things, that Slovenia proceed promptly with plans to adopt a definition of torture in conformity with article 1 of the Convention; that it establish an effective and independent system to undertake investigations into allegations of ill-treatment or torture; and that it strengthen existing efforts to reduce occurrences of ill-treatment by police and other public officials, in particular those that were ethnically motivated.
Among positive aspects to the initial report of Belgium, the Committee noted Belgium’s recognition of the competence of the Committee to receive inter-State and individual complaints under articles 21 and 22 of the Convention, and the creation and subsequent expansion of the powers of Belgium’s Standing Committee on the Control of Police Services. The Committee expressed concern, among other things, at cases of the use of excessive force during demonstrations or the expulsion of foreigners; and at the possibility of ordering the isolation of juvenile delinquents aged 12 and over for up to 17 days. Among its recommendations were that Belgian authorities ensure that all elements of the definition of torture in article 1 of the Convention were included in the definition established in Belgian criminal law; that Belgium ensure that guidelines on the use of force in dealing with public demonstrations and the expulsion of foreigners were in line with the guidelines of the Convention; and that it proceed immediately with investigations of allegations of excessive use of force by public officials.
The Committee cited among positive developments in Moldova that the new Criminal Code of Moldova would provide a legal framework for more humane treatment for detainees; and that Moldova had agreed to publicize the reports and responses resulting from the visits of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture. The panel noted concern, among other things, at numerous and consistent allegations of acts of torture and other ill-treatment of detainees in police custody, and at deletion of the definition of torture in the new Criminal Code that was in conformity with that of the Convention. The Committee recommended, among other things, that Moldova ensure prompt, impartial and full investigations into the many allegations of torture; that it discontinue the practice of administrative police detention; and that it establish an independent administrative body competent to deal with complaints against the police and law enforcement personnel.
In addition to reviewing country reports in public session, the Committee considered in private meetings information appearing to contain well-founded indications that torture was being systematically practiced in the territories of some States parties. And it examined communications from individuals claiming to be victims of violations by States parties of the provisions of the Convention. Such communications are accepted only if they concern the 52 States that have declared the Committee competent to receive complaints under article 22 of the Convention.
At its closing meeting today, the Committee discussed measures that might result in the submission of State reports long overdue -- it was reported that the Committee’s working group on overdue reports had met recently with representatives of three countries whose reports were five or more years overdue. The Committee also discussed the outcome of a joint meeting held with the International Law Commission on the topic of State reservations to international human rights treaties; and a letter sent to the Committee from the Human Rights Committee on the subject of a draft general comment on article 2 of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights.
The Committee’s next session will be from 10 to 21 November 2003. It is scheduled to examine reports from Colombia, Latvia, Yemen, Lithuania, Cameroon, and Morocco.

Conclusions and Recommendations on Country Reports
The Committee issued provisional conclusions and recommendations on an initial report of Cambodia, saying it regretted the absence of a delegation with which it could have carried out a dialogue on the report and that it looked forward to receiving written responses to its questions and comments and to the issues raised in the present provisional conclusions and recommendations by 31 August 2003.
The Committee cited as positive the Government's willingness to continue undertaking legal reforms in order to fulfill its international obligations in the field of human rights; and its cooperation with United Nations agencies and mechanisms in the field of human rights.
It expressed concern, among other things, over numerous and consistent allegations of acts of torture and other ill-treatment in police stations and prisons; extended impunity for violations of human rights committed by law-enforcement officials and members of the armed forces; the failure of the Government to investigate acts of torture; allegations of widespread corruption among public officials in the criminal justice system; the lack of independence of the judiciary; the importance given to the confession in criminal proceedings and the reliance of the police and the judiciary on confessions to secure convictions; and the use of incommunicado detention for at least 48 hours, during which the detainee had no access to legal counsel or the opportunity to contact relatives.
Among the Committee's recommendations were that Cambodia incorporate into its domestic law the definition of torture set out in article 1 of the Convention, and that it characterize acts of torture as a specific crime punishable by appropriate sanctions; that Cambodia take effective measures to establish and ensure a fully independent and professional judiciary; that it ensure prompt, impartial and full investigations into the many allegations of torture; that it establish an independent body to deal with complaints against the police and other law-enforcement personnel; that the Cambodian Government take measures to ensure that evidence obtained under torture was not invoked in court; and that it increase its efforts to remedy prison overcrowding and establish an independent system to monitor the treatment of persons arrested, detained or imprisoned.
Among positive developments in Azerbaijan, the Committee said in its formal conclusions and recommendations, were efforts by the Government to address the Committee's previous concluding observations; the country's declaration under article 22 of the Convention enabling individuals to submit complaints to the Committee; and the introduction of the offense of torture into the new Criminal Code and reports of some convictions for this crime.
Concern was cited, among other things, about numerous allegations of torture and ill-treatment; the fact that the definition of torture in the new Criminal Code did not fully comply with article 1 of the Convention; reports that some persons had been held in police custody much beyond the time limit of 48 hours established in the Code of Criminal Procedure, and that in exceptional circumstances, persons could be held up to 10 days in temporary detention in local police facilities; reports of harassment and attacks on human rights defenders and organizations; and reports that, in many instances, judges refused to deal with visible evidence of torture and ill-treatment of detainees.
Implementing a new procedure for follow-up to its recommendations, the Committee requested that Azerbaijan provide within one year information on its responses to the following recommendations: that Azerbaijan clearly instruct police officers, investigative authorities and remand centre personnel that they must respect the right of detained persons to obtain access to a lawyer immediately following detention, and to a medical doctor upon request of the detainee; that it fully ensure prompt creation of a new Bar association; that it ensure the full protection of non-governmental human rights defenders and organizations; that it ensure that all persons had the right to review any decision about extradition to a country where the person faced a real risk of torture; and that it ensure that prompt, impartial and full investigations into all allegations of torture and ill-treatment were carried out and establish an independent body with the authority to receive and investigate all complaints of torture and other ill-treatment by officials.
The Committee also recommended, among other things, that Azerbaijan guarantee in practice that persons could not be held in initial preventive detention (police custody) beyond 48 hours; and that it transfer the remand centre of the Ministry of National Security to the authority of the Ministry of Justice or discontinue its use; and that it institute a system for regular and independent inspections of all places of detention.
The Committee noted with satisfaction that it had not received any complaints of torture or ill-treatment in Iceland. Among other positive aspects to the situation in the country, the Committee welcomed a new Act on Protection of Children and a new Act on Foreigners which offered greater protections for the persons concerned.
The Committee said it was still concerned that Icelandic law did not contain specific provisions ensuring that any statement that was established to have been made as a result of torture should not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings, as required by article 15 of the Convention. It added that it was concerned at the problem of inter-prisoner violence that had led some prisoners to request for voluntary placement in solitary confinement.
The Committee urged the State party to reconsider the Committee’s previous recommendations that torture be defined as a specific offense in Icelandic law and that legislation concerning evidence to be adduced in judicial proceedings be brought into line with article 15 of the Convention so as to exclude explicitly any evidence obtained as a result of torture. It also recommended that doctors who were in contact with persons subjected to any form of arrest, detention or imprisonment be trained in the field of prohibition of torture; that Iceland continue to address issues of inter-prisoner violence by actively monitoring such violence and ensuring that prison staff were trained and able to intervene appropriately; and that information on the investigation of cases of suicide in prison be included in Iceland’s next periodic report.
Positive developments in Turkey, the Committee said, included the lifting of the long-standing state of emergency in the country; Constitutional and legal reforms intended to strengthen the rule of law and align legislation with the Convention; and the inclusion in domestic legislation of the principle that evidence obtained through torture should not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings.
The Committee cited among matters of concern that there were numerous and consistent allegations that torture and other ill-treatment of detainees held in police custody were apparently still widespread in Turkey; that safeguards concerning the registration of detainees by police allegedly were not always complied with; that there were allegations that despite the number of complaints, prosecution and punishment of members of security forces for torture and ill-treatment were rare; that much importance was given to confessions in criminal proceedings and that the police and judiciary relied to a great extent on confessions to secure convictions; and that there was a lack of training of medical personnel dealing with detainees on matters related to the prohibition of torture.
It recommended, among other things, that Turkey ensure that the full benefits of safeguards against ill-treatment and torture of detainees be available in practice, particularly the right of detainees to medical and legal assistance and to contact with their families; that Turkey establish measures to guarantee prompt, impartial and full investigations into numerous allegations of torture and ill-treatment were carried out, and that it ensure an efficient and transparent complaints system in this connection; that Turkey expedite the trials and appeals of public officials indicted for torture or ill-treatment, and ensure that members of the security forces under investigation for such acts be suspended from duty during the investigation and dismissed if convicted; that Turkey solve the current problem in prisons generated as a result of the introduction of "F-type" prisons by implementing the recommendations of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture; that it review current legislation and practice to ensure that the expulsion of irregular aliens was performed within the legal guarantees required by international human rights standards, including the Convention; and that it provide in its next report information on the implementation of the "Return to Village Programme" regarding internally displaced persons.
The Committee noted a number of positive developments in Slovenia, among them the decision of the Supreme Court in 2000 limiting the duration of remand in custody to two years; amendments to the Aliens Act and Asylum Act bringing domestic legislation into conformity with article 3 of the Convention against Torture; and rules introduced in 2000 providing detailed regulations of the limits of police powers in official contacts with individuals.
Concern was expressed, among other things, about the lack of an independent system to investigate complaints and reports that allegations of ill-treatment were not investigated promptly and impartially; about continuing allegations of excessive use of force by the police, many of which concerned members of ethnic minorities; and about the lack of a code of conduct for police interrogations.
The Committee recommended, among other things, that Slovenia proceed promptly with plans to adopt a definition of torture which covered all elements of that contained in article 1 of the Convention and that it amend domestic penal law accordingly; that it repeal the statute of limitation for torture and increase the limitation period for other types of ill-treatment; and that it take measures to establish an effective and independent complaints system to undertake prompt and impartial investigations into allegations of ill-treatment or torture by police and other public officials, and that it punish the offenders; that Slovenia strengthen existing efforts to reduce occurrences of ill-treatment by police and other public officials, in particular those that were ethnically motivated; that it ensure that, in law as well as in practice, all persons deprived of their liberty be guaranteed the right to have access to an independent doctor; and that the Government continue efforts to address overcrowding in prisons and other places of detention.
Among positive developments in Belgium, the Committee noted Belgium’s recognition of the competence of the Committee to receive inter-State and individual complaints under articles 21 and 22 of the Convention; and the creation and subsequent expansion of the powers of the Standing Committee on the Control of Police Services.
It cited concern, among other things, at cases of the use of excessive force during demonstrations or the expulsion of foreigners; lack of legislation sufficient to ensure the rights of persons subject to judicial or administrative arrest to have access to a lawyer immediately upon arrest, to be clearly informed of their rights, and to be examined by a doctor of their choice; and the possibility of ordering the isolation of juvenile delinquents aged 12 and over for up to 17 days.
The Committee recommended, among other things, that Belgian authorities ensure that all elements of the definition of torture in article 1 of the Convention be included in the definition established in Belgian criminal law; that Belgium ensure that all officials committing acts of ill-treatment be liable to criminal charges, even it was established they were acting on the orders of a superior; that Belgium include in its Penal Code a clause expressly prohibiting the invocation of a state of emergency as justification for the violation of the right not to be submitted to torture; that it ensure that guidelines on the use of force in dealing with public demonstrations and expulsion of foreigners were in line with the guidelines of the Convention; that it ensure that the placement of minors in isolation was not done except in exceptional circumstances, and that such isolation was only for a limited time; and that it clearly state in legislation that evidence obtained under torture was automatically inadmissible and must not be considered by the courts.
The Committee cited among positive aspects to the report of Moldova indications that the new Criminal Code would provide a legal framework for more humane treatment for detainees; and efforts by Moldovan authorities to improve prison conditions.
Concern was expressed, among other things, at numerous and consistent allegations of acts of torture and other ill-treatment of detainees in police custody; at a reported lack of prompt and adequate access of persons in police custody to legal and medical assistance, and to family members; at deletion of the definition of torture in the new Criminal Code that was in conformity with that of the Convention; at administrative police detention for up to 30 days in temporary holding facilities under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of the Interior; and at allegations concerning a heavy emphasis put on confessions as a primary source of evidence in criminal proceedings.
The Committee recommended, among other things, that Moldova ensure that the fundamental safeguards against torture and ill-treatment of detainees, including those held for administrative offences, be made available in practice; that Moldova incorporate into the new Criminal Code a definition of torture in conformity with article 1 of the Convention; that it ensure prompt, impartial and full investigation into the many allegations of torture; that it discontinue the practice of administrative police detention; that it establish an independent administrative body competent to deal with complaints against the police and law enforcement personnel; that Moldova take effective measures to ensure a fully independent Procuracy and judiciary, if necessary by calling for international cooperation; that it take measures to ensure that evidence obtained under torture was not invoked in court; that it issue directives on the proper conduct of police interrogations, including a total prohibition of ill-treatment and torture; and that it establish an independent system to monitor the treatment of persons arrested, detained, or imprisoned.

Background On Convention And Committee
The Convention, adopted unanimously by the General Assembly in 1984, entered into force on 26 June 1987. States parties to the Convention are required to outlaw torture and are explicitly prohibited from using « higher orders » or « exceptional circumstances » as excuses for acts of torture. The Convention introduced two significant new elements to the United Nations fight against torture. First, it specifies that alleged torturers may be tried in any State party or they may be extradited to face trial in the State party where their crimes were committed. Second, under article 20, it provides for investigation of reliable reports of torture, including visits to the State party concerned, with its agreement, if the Committee receives reliable information which appears to contain well-founded indications that torture is being systematically practiced in the territory of a State party.
Under article 21, a State party to the Convention may at any time declare that it recognizes the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications to the effect that a State party claims that another State party is not fulfilling its obligations under the Convention.
Under article 22, a State party to the Convention may at any time declare that it recognizes the competence of the Committee to receive and consider communications from, or on behalf of, individuals subject to its jurisdiction who claim to be victims of a violation by a State party of the provisions of the Convention.
The Convention has been ratified or acceded to by the following 133 States: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Côte d'Ivoire, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Finland, France, Gabon, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Holy See, Honduras, Hungary, Iceland, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lebanon, Lesotho, Libya, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malawi, Mali, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Somalia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Timor Leste, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, Yemen, Yugoslavia and Zambia.
The following 47 States have recognized the competence of the Committee under articles 21 and 22: Algeria, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Canada, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, France, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malta, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Paraguay, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Senegal, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Togo, Tunisia, Turkey, Uruguay, Venezuela and Yugoslavia. In addition, Japan, Uganda, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America have recognized the competence of the Committee under article 21 only. Azerbaijan, Mexico and Seychelles have recognized the competence of the Committee under article 22 only.

Other United Nations Activities against Torture
In addition to preventive measures, the United Nations has taken action to come to the aid of torture victims. In 1981 the General Assembly set up the United Nations Voluntary Trust Fund for Victims of Torture. The Commission on Human Rights has repeatedly appealed to all Governments, organizations and individuals in a position to do so to contribute to the Fund in order to allow it to respond to the constantly increasing number of requests for assistance. Furthermore, on 25 April 2001, the Commission extended the mandate of its Special Rapporteur on Torture for three years, encouraging all Governments to envisage inviting him to visit their countries.

Membership and Officers
The Committee's members are elected by the States parties to the Convention and serve in their personal capacity. The current members of the Committee are: Peter Thomas Burns (Canada); Guibril Camara (Senegal); Sayed Kassem el Masry (Egypt); Felice Gaer (the United States of America); Fernando Marino Menendez (Spain); Andreas Mavrommatis (Cyprus); Ole Vedel Rasmussen (Denmark); Alexander M. Yakovlev (the Russian Federation); and Yu Mengja (China). One seat is temporarily vacant due to the death of Mr. Alejandro Gonzalez Poblete, member from Chile.



* *** *