DANISH DELEGATION RESPONDS TO QUESTIONS POSED BY COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE

CAT
28th session
3 May 2002
Afternoon



Procedures Described for Solitary Confinement, Crowd Control, Asylum-Seekers, Other Matters
A six-member Government delegation from Denmark told the Committee against Torture this afternoon of regulations on solitary confinement and crowd control -- including the use of dogs -- and of efforts to attract minority applicants to the police force.
Responding to questions put by Committee members on Thursday morning -- upon presentation of Denmark's fourth periodic report on its compliance with the Convention against Torture -- the delegation also said the Danish Government considered that existing criminal provisions covered all possible acts of torture although there was no precise definition and law criminalizing torture, as called for by the Convention.
Committee members reiterated that current laws were insufficient, as a conviction for "torture" -- as compared, for example, to a conviction for assault -- carried a special weight and opprobrium that amounted to a deterrent, and because such a law enabled the compilation of statistics necessary for gauging the extent to which torture occurred and for devising strategies to eradicate it.
The Government delegation said solitary confinement of pretrial detainees had been reviewed and made subject to new regulations in 2000; abolition of the practice was considered but it was decided that such confinement was occasionally necessary if contact between a suspect and outsiders could hinder the course of justice. Solitary confinement of convicted offenders was decided upon by prison authorities to protect other inmates or to avoid a high risk of escape and had been imposed some 740 times in the year 2000; such situations were reviewed weekly, the delegation said, and most did not last more than seven days.
The use of dogs for crowd control during violent demonstrations and similar incidents had been reviewed and it had been recommended that dogs only be employed when other methods had been ineffective, the Government representatives said. They said a number of steps had been taken to attract qualified applicants for police work from non-Danish ethnic groups. And they described asylum procedures, saying regulations were in force to prevent expulsion of aliens who stood a reasonable risk of undergoing torture or facing the death penalty if returned to their home countries.
The Committee's formal conclusions and recommendations on the report of Denmark will be issued at 3 p.m. on Friday, 10 May.
Denmark, as one of the 129 States parties to the Convention against Torture, must submit periodic reports on its efforts to implement the provisions of the treaty.
The Committee will reconvene at 10 a.m. on Monday, 6 May, to begin its consideration of a fourth periodic report of Norway.

Discussion
Members of the Danish delegation, responding to questions put by Committee members on Thursday morning, said among other things that a precise definition and provision of torture incorporated in domestic law, as suggested by the Committee, was not in prospect, but it was considered that Danish criminal legislation covered all possible acts of torture and under a collective definition broader than that provided by the Convention against Torture. Danish criminal law also required that the seriousness of a crime be taken into account, along with motives, in deciding on sentencing, and so there was no doubt that an offense of torture would be considered as an "aggravating circumstance" in the sentencing of a violator, and would result in a sentence taking into account the seriousness of the crime.
Solitary confinement in pretrial detention was subject to new rules adopted by Parliament in 2000, the delegation said; abolition of solitary confinement in such circumstances was considered, but it was felt that in some cases it was called for because occasionally it was best to cut off all contact of a suspect with outsiders, to avoid obstruction of justice. But the matter was being further considered. All defendants in solitary confinement had the right to confidential access to a lawyer and to unregulated mail contact with a lawyer.
Solitary confinement of convicted offenders was at the discretion of the prison service, the delegation said; it could be ordered to prevent danger to other prisoners or to counteract a high risk of escape; inmates excluded from interaction from others were kept in special rooms in a special unit; some "exclusion from association" was not total -- in some cases the prisoner had contact with another inmate; each case of solitary confinement was reviewed each week. A working group had found that solitary confinement could be justified for preserving peace within a prison; it found that solitary confinement for more than two weeks ran a higher risk of being harmful, and recommended that association be allowed with at least one other inmate; after two weeks it also was suggested that such an inmate be allowed some association, such as working for limited periods with other inmates.
The working group found that solitary confinement should not in general exceed three months, the delegation said, but for lengthier periods special high-security units could be set up where small numbers of inmates -- six or eight -- were in exclusionary situations together. Two such units had been set up. The prisoner mentioned by the Committee as having been in solitary confinement for 1,500 days now was allowed to associate with another inmate; he was judged to pose an extremely high risk of escape and the Parliamentary Ombudsman had reviewed the matter and found that it did not amount to ill-treatment. The report and recommendations of the working group would be discussed further by Parliament, and some time likely would pass before further decisions on solitary confinement were taken.
The Prison and Probation Service in 2000 had decided on solitary confinement situations in 740 cases, the delegation said; most were terminated within seven days; there had been a significant drop in recent years in long terms of solitary confinement.
A Peruvian national had broken his arm while placed in a detention cell, the delegation said; a certain technique was used to twist his arm and handcuff him, and yet he did not say anything about the injury until he was released hours later; an investigation followed and the prosecutor decided there was no reason to discipline the police officers involved; but it was concluded to mention in training of police officers that intake of alcohol might affect a detainee's sense of pain and obscure an injury; use of the arm-twisting technique was reviewed, including by medical experts; it was decided not to change regulations or procedures as in the particular case the detainee's response was dulled by intoxication; compensation was not ruled to be appropriate because it was found that the police had acted reasonably under the circumstances.
Since 1996, the delegation said, 39 evening class courses aiming to qualify young people of ethnic backgrounds other than Danish for police work had been held; a number of other steps had been taken to attract qualified ethnic applicants to the police academy.
It had been recommended that a codified legal basis for police powers to use force should be found, the delegation said; it was recommended only to use dogs for crowd control in terms of passive resistance only when less extreme methods had failed.
Three units in the country's closed prison had been set up for "negatively strong" inmates, the delegation said; the only purpose of the units was to protect other inmates; the inmates in the special units associated with each other; after two or three years, it appeared that the system worked well.
A new type of residence permit was being used for asylum applicants possibly facing torture or application of the death penalty if returned to their home countries, the delegation said; the relevant bill made specific reference to article 3 of the Convention against Torture. An asylum seeker had the right to choose an attorney to represent him before the country's refugee board. Aliens risking persecution if refouled were protected from deportation unless they were determined to be a threat to Danish security or in certain other limited cases. An asylum-seeker could be returned to a "safe" third country on occasion, although a careful assessment was made of whether the third country truly would be safe. The Government would continue to comply with requests of the Committee to suspend decisions on returning aliens in specific cases.
Denmark considered that diplomatic immunity applied to the current Israeli Ambassador to Denmark, the delegation said, although one Committee member had suggested that the Ambassador should be prosecuted, as he was a former head of the Israeli security service and had sanctioned treatment of Palestinian detainees that the Committee itself had defined as torture.



* *** *