General Documents Not Relating To Specific States - Annual and Sessional Reports - CAT - CAT

CONTENTS

[Original: English]

[24 June 1993]

Paragraphs Page

I.ORGANIZATIONAL AND OTHER MATTERS .....................1 - 231

A.States parties to the Convention .................1 - 21

B.Opening and duration of the sessions .............3 - 41

C.Membership and attendance ........................5 - 61

D.Officers ......................................... 71

E.Agendas ..........................................8 - 92

F.Working methods of the Committee .................10 - 123

G.Cooperation between the Committee and the Board of

Trustees of the United Nations Voluntary Fund for

Victims of Torture ............................... 133

H.Question of a draft optional protocol to the

Convention .......................................14 - 163

I.Preparatory activities relating to the World

Conference on Human Rights .......................17 - 234

II.ACTION BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AT ITS FORTY-SEVENTH

SESSION ..............................................24 - 307

A.Annual report submitted by the Committee against

Torture under article 24 of the Convention .......25 - 267

B.Effective implementation of international

instruments on human rights, including reporting

obligations under international instruments on

human rights .....................................27 - 307

III.SUBMISSION OF REPORTS BY STATES PARTIES UNDER

ARTICLE 19 OF THE CONVENTION .........................31 - 418

IV.CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS SUBMITTED BY STATES PARTIES

UNDER ARTICLE 19 OF THE CONVENTION ...................42 - 45810

Afghanistan ..........................................50 - 6211

Norway ...............................................63 - 8713

Argentina ............................................88 - 11517

Ukraine .............................................. 116 - 13222

New Zealand .......................................... 133 - 16024

CONTENTS (continued)

Paragraphs Page

Germany .............................................161 - 18028

Libyan Arab Jamahiriya ..............................181 - 20732

Mexico ..............................................208 - 22936

Belarus .............................................230 - 26040

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland:

dependent territories ...............................261 - 28344

Canada ..............................................284 - 31048

Panama ..............................................311 - 34152

Hungary .............................................342 - 36456

Sweden ..............................................365 - 38659

China ...............................................387 - 42962

Spain ...............................................430 - 45868

V.ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMITTEE UNDER ARTICLE 20 OF THE

CONVENTION ..........................................459 - 46373

VI.CONSIDERATION OF COMMUNICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 22 OF

THE CONVENTION ......................................464 - 47574

VII.FUTURE MEETINGS OF THE COMMITTEE ....................476 - 47876

VIII.ADOPTION OF THE ANNUAL REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ......479 - 48177

Annexes

I.List of States which have signed, ratified or acceded to the

Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading

Treatment or Punishment as at 30 April 1993 .....................78

II.Membership of the Committee against Torture (1992-1993) .........81

III.Status of submission of reports by States parties under

article 19 of the Convention as at 30 April 1993 ................82

IV.Country rapporteurs and alternate rapporteurs for each of the

reports of States parties considered by the Committee at its

ninth and tenth sessions ........................................87

V.List of documents issued for the Committee during the reporting

period ..........................................................88

I. ORGANIZATIONAL AND OTHER MATTERS

A. States parties to the Convention

1.As at 30 April 1993, the closing date of the tenth session of the Committee against Torture, there were 72 States parties to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The Convention was adopted by the General Assembly in resolution 39/46 of 10 December 1984 and opened for signature and ratification in New York on 4 February 1985. It entered into force on 26 June 1987 in accordance with the provisions of its article 27. A list of States which have signed, ratified or acceded to the Convention together with an indication of those that have made declaration under articles 21 and 22 of the Convention is contained in annex I to the present report.

2.The texts of the declarations, reservations or objections made by States parties with respect to the Convention are reproduced in document CAT/C/2/Rev.2.

B. Opening and duration of the sessions

3.The Committee against Torture has held two sessions since the adoption of its last annual report. The ninth and tenth sessions of the Committee were held at the United Nations Office at Geneva from 9 to 20 November 1992 and from 19 to 30 April 1993.

4.At its ninth session, the Committee held 18 meetings (119th to 136th meeting) and at its tenth session the Committee held 17 meetings (137th to 153rd meeting). An account of the deliberations of the Committee at its ninth and tenth sessions is contained in the relevant summary records (CAT/C/SR.119-153).

C. Membership and attendance

5.The membership remained the same as during 1992. The list of the members, together with an indication of the duration of their term of office, appears in annex II to the present report.

6.All the members attended the ninth session of the Committee; Mr. Dipanda Mouelle attended a part of the session. The tenth session of the Committee was attended by all the members.

D. Officers

7.The following members of the Committee acted as officers during the reporting period:

Chairman: Mr. Joseph Voyame

Vice-Chairmen: Mr. Alexis Dipanda Mouelle

Mr. Ricardo Gil Lavedra

Mr. Dimitar N. Mikhailov

Rapporteur: Mr. Peter Thomas Burns

E. Agendas

8.At its 119th meeting, on 9 November 1992, the Committee adopted the following items, listed in the provisional agenda submitted by the Secretary-General in accordance with rule 6 of the rules of procedure (CAT/C/19), as the agenda of its ninth session:

1.Adoption of the agenda.

2.Organizational and other matters.

3.Submission of reports by States parties under article 19 of the Convention.

4.Consideration of reports submitted by States parties under article 19 of the Convention.

5.Consideration of information received under article 20 of the Convention.

6.Consideration of communications under article 22 of the Convention.

7.Preparatory activities relating to the World Conference on Human Rights.

9.At its 137th meeting, on 19 April 1993, the Committee adopted the following items, listed in the provisional agenda submitted by the Secretary-General in accordance with rule 6 of the rules of procedure (CAT/C/22), as the agenda of its tenth session:

1.Adoption of the agenda.

2.Organizational and other matters.

3.Submission of reports by States parties under article 19 of the Convention.

4.Consideration of reports submitted by States parties under article 19 of the Convention.

5.Consideration of information received under article 20 of the Convention.

6.Consideration of communications under article 22 of the Convention.

7.Future meetings of the Committee.

8.Action by the General Assembly at its forty-seventh session:

(a)Annual report submitted by the Committee against Torture under article 24 of the Convention;

(b)Effective implementation of international instruments on human rights, including reporting obligations under international instruments on human rights.

9.Preparatory activities relating to the World Conference on Human Rights.

10.Annual report of the Committee on its activities.

F. Working methods of the Committee

Ninth session

10.At its 136th meeting, on 20 November 1992, the Committee exchanged views on possible ways to make its methods of work more effective and requested the Secretariat to prepare a report which would provide information on the working methods of other human rights treaty bodies and give the Committee general ideas on how it could improve its work.

Tenth session

11.In connection with this question, the Committee had before it an informal note by the Secretariat providing information on the working methods of other human rights treaty bodies.

12.Owing to lack of time, the Committee decided, at its 152nd meeting, on 29 April 1993, to postpone consideration of this question until its eleventh session, in November 1993.

G. Cooperation between the Committee and the Board of Trustees

of the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture

13.The Committee and the Board of Trustees of the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture held a joint meeting on 28 April 1993, during the 151st meeting of the Committee. The Chairman of the Committee and the Chairman of the Board of Trustees, Mr. Jaap Walkate, provided information on the most recent activities of both organs and the members exchanged views on how to make public opinion better informed of their work. Mr. Bent Sørensen, at the Committee's invitation, provided information on the activities of the European Committee established under the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, of which he had been member and First Vice-Chairman since September 1989.

H. Question of a draft optional protocol to the Convention

14.At the 119th meeting, on 9 November 1992, the Chairman of the Committee informed the other members that he had attended a meeting of the Working Group set up by the Commission on Human Rights to prepare a draft optional protocol to the Convention. 1/ The Working Group had held its first session at the United Nations Office at Geneva from 19 to 30 October 1992. It had welcomed the comments of the Committee against Torture on the draft optional protocol which had been submitted to it in a working document (E/CN.4/1992/WG.11/WP.1/Add.2).

15.The Chairman of the Committee provided information on the discussion which had taken place in the Working Group with his participation. He pointed out that the Working Group had decided to invite, at its following sessions, a member of the Committee who would attend the meetings of the Group, give his contribution to the discussions, and provide information on matters of mutual concern for both the Group and the Committee.

16.The Committee agreed to designate Mr. Bent Sørensen as its observer in the future sessions of the Working Group.

I. Preparatory activities relating to the World Conference

on Human Rights

Ninth session

17.At the 119th meeting, on 9 November 1992, Mr. Sørensen, who had been designated by the Committee as its representative to the Preparatory Committee for the World Conference on Human Rights, reported on the activities of the Preparatory Committee at its third session, held at the United Nations Office at Geneva from 14 to 18 September 1992, as well as on his participation in the discussions. Mr. Ben Ammar informed the Committee about his participation as representative of a non-governmental organization in the African Regional Preparatory Meeting for the World Conference, which had taken place at Tunis from 2 to 6 November 1992.

18.At the same meeting, and at its 126th, 127th and 136th meetings, on 13 and 20 November 1992, the Committee discussed how it should participate in the various meetings to be held in connection with preparations for the World Conference on Human Rights, and the Conference itself to be held at Vienna from 14 to 25 June 1993.

19.The Committee decided that Mr. Sørensen would continue to act as its representative to the Preparatory Committee for the Conference and Mr. Mikhailov as its alternative representative. The Committee postponed until a later stage a decision on its representation at the Conference itself.

20.In addition, at its 136th meeting, on 20 November 1992, the Committee, pursuant to the request made by the General Assembly in paragraph 10 of resolution 45/155, adopted the following recommendations to the Preparatory Committee for the World Conference on Human Rights, and to the Conference itself:

"The Committee against Torture,

"Pursuant to paragraphs 9 and 10 of General Assembly resolution 45/155 of 18 December 1990 and paragraph 5 of Commission on Human Rights resolution 1991/30 of 5 March 1991,

"1.Appoints Mr. Sørensen as representative and Mr. Mikhailov as alternate to the meetings of the Preparatory Committee for the World Conference on Human Rights;

"2.Recommends that:

"(a)With a view to eradicating torture by the year 2000, the subject matter should be included in the agenda of the World Conference;

"(b)An energetic and concerted effort should be made both during the process of preparation for the World Conference and at the Conference itself to encourage:

"(i)States that have not yet done so to become parties to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, including its articles 20, 21 and 22;

"(ii)Those States parties to the Convention which have not done so to declare in favour of the provisions of articles 20, 21 and 22;

"(c)In view of the unfortunate rise of ethnic violence, torture and other human rights breaches in all their manifestations in various regions of the world, the possibility should be examined of:

"(i)Preventing human rights violations, especially the crime of torture, and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, within the scope of the activities of the Committee;

"(ii)Increasing the United Nations budgetary resources allocated to human rights;

"3.Would welcome the opportunity, within the framework of the World Conference, for a meeting to be convened with the participation of the chairpersons and/or representatives of the United Nations human rights treaty bodies and the chairpersons and/or representatives of each of the principal regional and other human rights organizations to deal with the matters referred to;

"4.Would also welcome the Preparatory Committee and the World Conference exploring the following broader issues:

"(a)The establishment of a high commissioner for human rights;

"(b)The creation of an international court for human rights;

"(c)The establishment of a research institute for human rights connected with the Centre for Human Rights of the United Nations Secretariat;

"(d)Cooperation and coordination with regional systems for the protection of human rights;

"5.Suggests that, with a view to improving the implementation of existing human rights standards and instruments, the following topics should be considered as appropriate ones for inclusion by the World Conference in its agenda:

"(a)An examination of the issues relevant to the implementation of the Convention against Torture;

"(b)An evaluation of the effectiveness of United Nations monitoring methods and mechanisms;

"(c)A formulation of concrete recommendations for improving the effectiveness of United Nations mechanisms (especially the functioning of the Convention against Torture) aimed at promoting, encouraging and monitoring respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms."

Tenth session

21.At the 147th meeting, on 26 April 1993, Mr. El Ibrashi reported on his participation in the Asian regional meeting for the preparation of the World Conference on Human Rights, which had been held at Bangkok from 29 March to 2 April 1993.

22.At the 148th meeting, on 26 April 1993, Mr. Sørensen reported on his participation in the fourth session of the Preparatory Committee for the Conference, which was being held at Geneva from 19 to 30 April 1993.

23.At its 151st meeting, on 28 April 1993, the Committee decided that its Chairman would represent it at the World Conference on Human Rights. Mr. Sørensen would act as his alternate. Mr. Ben Ammar and Mr. Burns, who would also participate in the Conference on behalf of non-governmental organizations, would also represent the Committee, with Mr. Sørensen being the Committee's primary spokesman.

II. ACTION BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AT ITS FORTY-SEVENTH SESSION

24.The Committee considered this agenda item at its 144th meeting, on 22 April 1993.

A. Annual report submitted by the Committee against Torture

under article 24 of the Convention

25.The Committee had before it an informal note by the Secretariat based on the summary records of the Third Committee of the General Assembly covering the discussion of its annual report (A/C.3/47/SR.40 and 42-45), and General Assembly resolution 47/113 of 16 December 1992 and Commission on Human Rights resolution 1993/37 of 5 March 1993 on the status of the Convention.

26.The Committee took note of the resolutions and of the views expressed during the discussion in the Third Committee of the General Assembly.

B. Effective implementation of international instruments

on human rights, including reporting obligations

under international instruments on human rights

Ninth session

27.The Committee held an exchange of views on issues relating to this sub-item at its 124th meeting, on 12 November 1992. The Chairman of the Committee, who had participated in the fourth meeting of persons chairing the human rights treaty bodies, held at the United Nations Office at Geneva from 12 to 16 October 1992, provided information on the conclusions and recommendations of that meeting.

28.In addition, in accordance with the relevant decisions adopted by the Committee at its sixth session, at the 136th meeting, on 20 November 1992, Mr. Sørensen reported on the activities of the Committee on the Rights of the Child and Mr. Voyame reported on the activities of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women.

Tenth session

29.The Committee had before it the report of the fourth meeting of persons chairing the human rights treaty bodies (A/47/628, annex), General Assembly resolution 47/111 of 16 December 1992 and Commission on Human Rights resolution 1993/16 of 26 February 1993.

30.The Committee took note of the above-mentioned report and resolutions.

III. SUBMISSION OF REPORTS BY STATES PARTIES UNDER

ARTICLE 19 OF THE CONVENTION

Action taken by the Committee to ensure the submission

of reports

Ninth session

31.The Committee, at its 131st meeting, on 17 November 1992, considered the status of submission of reports under article 19 of the Convention. The Committee had before it the following documents:

(a)Note by the Secretary-General concerning initial reports of 27 States parties which were due in 1988 (CAT/C/5);

(b)Note by the Secretary-General concerning initial reports of 10 States parties which were due in 1989 (CAT/C/7);

(c)Note by the Secretary-General concerning initial reports of 11 States parties that were due in 1990 (CAT/C/9);

(d)Note by the Secretary-General concerning initial reports of 7 States parties that were due in 1991 (CAT/C/12);

(e)Note by the Secretary-General concerning initial reports of 10 States parties that were due in 1992 (CAT/C/16/Rev.1);

(f)Note by the Secretary-General concerning second periodic reports of 26 States parties that were due in 1992 (CAT/C/17).

32.The Committee was informed that, in addition to the 11 reports that were scheduled for consideration by the Committee at its ninth session (see para. 42 below), the Secretary-General had received the additional report of China (CAT/C/7/Add.14) requested by the Committee at its fourth session under rule 67, paragraph 2, of its rules of procedure, the initial report of Peru (CAT/C/7/Add.15), and additional information from Australia (CAT/C/9/Add.11) and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.*

33.In accordance with rule 65 of the Committee's rules of procedure and its decisions, the Secretary-General continued sending reminders automatically to those States parties whose initial reports were more than 12 months overdue, and subsequent reminders every six months. In the case of reports which were more than three years overdue, the Chairman of the Committee, at its request, discussed the question of reporting obligations with the representatives of the States parties concerned or addressed a letter on the subject to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, as appropriate. Those States were Togo and Uganda, whose

initial reports were due in 1988, but had not yet been received after five reminders; and Guyana, whose initial report, due in 1989, had not yet been received after four reminders.

__________

*Information consisting of legal and judicial texts or statistical tables was made available to the Committee, but it has not been issued as a document.

34.In addition, second reminders were sent by the Secretary-General in June 1992 to Brazil, Guinea and Poland and a third reminder to Portugal, whose initial reports were due in 1990 but had not yet been received. A first reminder was also sent in June 1992 to Paraguay and second reminders were sent in September 1992 to Guatemala and Somalia, whose initial reports were due in 1991 but had not yet been received.

Tenth session

35.At its 144th meeting, on 22 April 1993, the Committee also considered the status of submission of reports under article 19 of the Convention. In addition to the documents listed in paragraph 31 above, the Committee had before it two notes by the Secretary-General, concerning initial reports to be submitted by 6 States parties in 1993 (CAT/C/21), and second periodic reports to be submitted by 10 States parties in 1993 (CAT/C/20).

36.The Committee was informed that, in addition to the eight reports that were scheduled for consideration by the Committee at its tenth session (see para. 44 below), the Secretary-General had received the initial reports of Paraguay (CAT/C/12/Add.3) and Poland (CAT/C/9/Add.13), the second periodic reports of Ecuador (CAT/C/20/Add.1) and Egypt (CAT/C/17/Add.11) and additional information from the United Kingdom on its dependent territories (CAT/C/9/Add.14).

37.The Committee was also informed that initial reports had not yet been received from Togo and Uganda, whose reports were due in 1988, and Guyana, whose report was due in 1989. In this connection, the Committee decided that in addition to Togo and Uganda, Guyana should be requested to submit its initial and second periodic reports in one document. The Committee was informed that third reminders had been sent by the Secretary-General in January 1993 to Brazil and Guinea and a fourth reminder to Portugal, whose initial reports were due in 1990 but had not yet been received. A first reminder had also been sent in January 1993 to Malta and third reminders had been sent in March 1993 to Guatemala and Somalia, whose initial reports were due in 1991 but had not yet been received.

38.The Committee again requested the Secretary-General to continue sending reminders automatically to those States parties whose initial reports were more than 12 months overdue and subsequent reminders every six months.

39.In accordance with the decision adopted by the Committee at its seventh session, the Chairman, at the Committee's request, discussed with the representative of Portugal, whose report was more than three years overdue, the difficulties that prevented that State party from complying with its reporting obligations under the Convention. Portugal submitted its initial report (CAT/C/9/Add.15) in May 1993.

40.Finally, the Committee, noting that no reply had been received to the letters that its Chairman had addressed in July 1992 to the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Guyana, Togo, and Uganda with regard to their overdue reports, regretted that those States parties were not complying with the obligations they had freely assumed under the Convention.

41.The status of submission of reports by States parties under article 19 of the Convention as at April 1993, the closing date of the tenth session of the Committee, appears in annex III to the present report.

IV. CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS SUBMITTED BY STATES PARTIES

UNDER ARTICLE 19 OF THE CONVENTION

42.At its ninth and tenth sessions, the Committee examined initial reports submitted by four States parties and second periodic reports submitted by 10 States parties, under article 19, paragraph 1, of the Convention. It also examined additional reports requested from two States parties pursuant to rule 67, paragraph 2, of the rules of procedure. At its ninth session, the Committee devoted 16 of the 18 meetings held to the consideration of reports (see CAT/C/SR.119-123, 124/Add.1, 125 and Add.2, 126, 127 and Add.2, 128, 129 and Add.2, 130, 131 and Add.2, 132, 133 and Add.2, 134/Add.1, 135 and Add.2). The following reports, listed in the order in which they had been received by the Secretary-General, were before the Committee at its ninth session:

Afghanistan (initial report)(CAT/C/5/Add.31)

Germany (initial report)(CAT/C/12/Add.1)

United Kingdom of Great Britain and

Northern Ireland: dependent territories

(initial report)(CAT/C/9/Add.10)

Norway (second periodic report)(CAT/C/17/Add.1)

Argentina (second periodic report)(CAT/C/17/Add.2)

Mexico (second periodic report)(CAT/C/17/Add.3)

New Zealand (initial report)(CAT/C/12/Add.2)

Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (additional report)(CAT/C/9/Add.12/Rev.1)

Ukraine (second periodic report)(CAT/C/17/Add.4)

Canada (second periodic report)(CAT/C/17/Add.5)

Belarus (second periodic report)(CAT/C/17/Add.6)

43.At its 119th meeting, on 9 November 1992, the Committee agreed, at the request of the Government concerned, to postpone until its tenth session the consideration of the second periodic report of Canada.

44.At its tenth session, the Committee devoted 8 of the 17 meetings held to the consideration of reports submitted by States parties (see CAT/C/SR.139-142, 142/Add.2, 143 and Add.2, 144 and Add.2, 145 and Add.2 and 146 and Add.2 and 4). The following reports listed in the order in which they had been received by the Secretary-General, were before the Committee at its tenth session:

Belize (initial report)(CAT/C/5/Add.25)

Canada (second periodic report)(CAT/C/17/Add.5)

Panama (second periodic report)(CAT/C/17/Add.7)

Hungary (second periodic report)(CAT/C/17/Add.8)

Sweden (second periodic report)(CAT/C/17/Add.9)

China (additional report)(CAT/C/7/Add.14)

Peru (initial report)(CAT/C/7/Add.15)

Spain (second periodic report)(CAT/C/17/Add.10)

45.At its 137th and 142nd meetings, on 19 and 21 April 1993, the Committee agreed, at the request of the Governments concerned, to postpone until its eleventh session the consideration of the initial reports of Belize and Peru.

46.In accordance with rule 66 of the rules of procedure of the Committee, representatives of all the reporting States were invited to attend the meetings of the Committee when their reports were examined. All of the States parties whose reports were considered by the Committee sent representatives to participate in the examination of their respective reports.

47.In accordance with the decision taken by the Committee at its fourth session, 2/ country rapporteurs and alternate rapporteurs were designated by the Chairman, in consultation with the members of the Committee during sessions and the Secretariat, for each of the reports submitted by States parties and considered by the Committee at its ninth and tenth sessions. The list of those reports and the names of the country rapporteurs and their alternates for each of them appear in annex IV to the present report.

48.In connection with its consideration of reports, the Committee also had before it the following documents:

(a)Status of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and reservations and declarations under the Convention (CAT/C/2/Rev.2);

(b)General guidelines regarding the form and contents of initial reports to be submitted by States parties under article 19 of the Convention (CAT/C/4/Rev.2);

(c)General guidelines regarding the form and contents of periodic reports to be submitted by States parties under article 19 of the Convention (CAT/C/14).

49.The following sections, arranged on a country-by-country basis according to the sequence followed by the Committee in its consideration of the reports, contain summaries based on the records of the meetings at which the reports were considered. More detailed information is contained in the reports submitted by the States parties and in the summary records of the relevant meetings of the Committee.

Afghanistan

50.The Committee considered the initial report of Afghanistan (CAT/C/5/Add.31) at its 120th and 121st meetings, on 10 November 1992 (see CAT/C/SR.120 and 121).

51.The report was introduced by the representative of the State party, who pointed out that his country was not always in a position to respect its international commitments on account of domestic problems and the lack of infrastructure needed to apply international standards. In that connection, Afghanistan would welcome any assistance that could be provided by the United Nations and the advisory services of the Centre for Human Rights. The representative drew particular attention to the fact that the report under consideration had been prepared and submitted by the previous regime, in power in January 1992, and that it had a number of shortcomings, particularly with regard to measures taken to give effect to the provisions of the Convention. Since the report had been drafted, enormous changes had taken place in Afghanistan and the new administration was combating social injustice in accordance with Islamic doctrine. The transitional government was facing difficulties due to Afghanistan's internal conflicts, but free and democratic elections would help normalize the situation. A new constitution was being drafted which was based on Islamic principles and which would be in accordance with international human rights instruments. Measures were also taken to improve the judiciary and to prevent criminal acts in the country.

52.Members of the Committee recognized the seriousness of the problems Afghanistan was facing and recalled that under the Convention no exceptional circumstances may be invoked as a justification of torture. They generally wished to know how international law was currently incorporated into domestic law, whether the Constitution quoted in the report was still in force, how the legal system of criminal law operated in Afghanistan, to what extent Islamic law was incorporated into Afghan criminal law and whether the new regime in power considered itself bound by the international conventions ratified by the previous regime. Members of the Committee also sought clarification on the structure of the judiciary, its independence and its relation with Islamic courts. With regard to the report under consideration, members of the Committee took note of the fact that it did not reflect the point of view of the present Government and they agreed that a new comprehensive report was necessary to understand how the Convention was applied in Afghanistan.

53.With reference to article 2 of the Convention, members of the Committee requested more detailed information on the rights of persons under arrest, including the right to be informed of charges against them, the right to remain silent, the right to have their relatives informed of their whereabouts, the right to communicate with a lawyer and to be examined by a doctor of their choosing. It was also asked whether there was in Afghanistan a code of conduct for methods of interrogation, whether a register was kept of persons under arrest, whether the accused was responsible for obtaining and paying a lawyer and whether the State provided such services. In addition, information was requested on the length and conditions of police custody and the procedure through which a person held in custody was brought before a judicial official. It was asked, in this connection, whether there had been any cases of torture in Afghanistan and whether representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross were authorized to visit detention centres in the country. It was further observed that a recent trial in Afghanistan, in which four persons had been sentenced to death, had been held in camera and that no appeal or review had been allowed and it was asked whether trials were open to the public under the new legal system and whether provision had been made for review or clemency in the case of persons convicted for serious offences.

54.With reference to article 4 of the Convention, clarification was sought as to what criminal penalties could be applied to those found guilty of practising torture.

55.In connection with article 8 of the Convention, it was observed that the constitutional provisions prohibiting the extradition of Afghan citizens to another State might not comply with the requirements of that article, unless provision was also made domestically for the prosecution of such citizens. It was pointed out that article 8 implied that even Afghan citizens must be extradited, for example, when they are accused of having committed torture in another State.

56.In connection with articles 10 and 14 of the Convention, it was asked whether education regarding the prohibition of torture was provided to various categories of medical personnel other than doctors, whether any medical rehabilitation programmes had been set up in Afghanistan, how victims of wrongful acts committed by agents of the State were compensated and whether there were statistics showing that any citizen had ever received such compensation.

57.With reference to article 15 of the Convention, clarification was requested about the sentences in the report which stated that confessions or statements obtained by compulsion were not "valid".

58.In connection with article 16 of the Convention, it was pointed out that, according to information received from Amnesty International, three persons had been publicly hanged in Kabul on 7 September 1992 and it was observed that public hangings could be regarded as cruel and degrading punishment. It was also noted that, according to the same source of information, a person in Afghanistan could be stoned to death for adultery or could be mutilated and submitted to corporal punishment for certain crimes punishable under Islamic law and it was asked whether Afghanistan characterized such penalties as "pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions", as stated in article 1 of the Convention.

59.In his reply, the representative of the State party stated that since the Islamic State had been restored in Afghanistan, torture as defined in the Convention was not practised; it was considered contrary to Islamic law and prohibited by the Penal Code. The legislation mentioned in the report was still valid, but it was likely to be amended following the adoption of the new Constitution and would be brought in line with Islamic precepts. He then referred to the categories of penalty in Islamic law and stated that the principle of the separation of powers was fully respected in his country. Judges were appointed by the head of State, who also decided on their promotion on the basis of reports made by the Minister of Justice. At present, the courts applied the Shariah laws, but not very strictly. In the event of any conflict between internal law and the Convention, the Convention took precedence. The representative stressed that the current leaders of Afghanistan would respect all conventions to which the country was a party under the previous regime and would submit a more detailed report to the Committee.

60.With reference to article 2 of the Convention, the representative stated that a state of siege had not been officially decreed in Afghanistan and that, following the general amnesty, all prisoners, including criminals, had been released. There were no longer any prisons in Afghanistan, but small detention centres only. There was a system of legal aid or legal assistance for the accused, but it was somewhat unsatisfactory, mainly because Afghanistan was an underdeveloped country.

61.In connection with article 14 of the Convention, the representative pointed out that the courts determined the nature and amount of compensation for loss or injury on the basis of the relevant Islamic precepts.

Conclusions and recommendations

62.The Committee was generally of the opinion that, in view of the enormous changes Afghanistan had been going through recently, the Government of Afghanistan should submit a new report combining the information required in an initial report, an additional report and a periodic report in a single document. The new report should take account of all the questions asked and follow the general guidelines of the Committee regarding the form and contents of reports to be submitted by States parties. It should focus, in particular, on such aspects as the structure of the legal system, conditions of detention and the role of training and education; it should also clarify to what extent Islamic law was incorporated into Afghan criminal law. The new report should be submitted by the end of June 1993, so that the Committee could discuss it at its November 1993 session. The Committee further recalled that the Centre for Human Rights was at the disposal of the Government of Afghanistan to help it draft its report and to provide technical assistance in the field of human rights.

Norway

63.The Committee considered the second periodic report of Norway (CAT/C/17/Add.1) at its 122nd and 123rd meetings, on 11 November 1992 (see CAT/C/SR.122 and 123).

64.In introducing the report, the representative of the State party indicated that the investigations of 368 alleged cases of large-scale police brutality in the city of Bergen, which had been discussed in May 1989 during the consideration by the Committee of the initial report of Norway, had resulted in only one charge; the investigation of more than 100 cases of alleged false accusations had resulted in 15 charges and 11 convictions, none of which had been appealed. No further information had been received concerning police brutality in Bergen.

65.Members of the Committee commended the Norwegian Government on the quality of its report, which had been submitted with punctuality and could serve as a model for the reports to be submitted by other States. They also noted with satisfaction Norway's support for the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture and the principle of preventive country visits, as contained in the draft optional protocol to the Convention which was under elaboration in a working group of the Commission on Human Rights.

66.Generally, members of the Committee felt that some clarification was necessary with regard to the incorporation of the Convention in domestic law and the implementation in practice of its provisions. They noted that Norway had a dualistic relationship between domestic law and international law, but it was not clear which legal provision took precedence and whether the Convention had actually been incorporated into domestic legislation. From the information provided, it appeared that the Convention was not a formal part of domestic law but that Norwegian courts were able to refer to international treaties in applying domestic law. Members of the Committee observed, in this connection, that the fact that Norwegian legislation did not contain a definition of torture automatically gave rise to problems with regard to the implementation of the provisions of the Convention. They therefore expressed the hope that the Norwegian authorities would reconsider their position that the term "torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" did not need to be incorporated into the country's legislation. In this regard, they wished to know what progress had been made by the Norwegian expert committee, which had been mentioned during the consideration of Norway's initial report, whose mandate was to make proposals on the way in which the major international human rights instruments could be incorporated into Norwegian legislation.

67.With regard to article 2 of the Convention, further information was requested on the authority deciding in Norway about deprivation of liberty and on the lawful period during which a person might be held in custody without being brought before a court.

68.With reference to article 3 of the Convention, members of the Committee requested information on how the 1988 Immigration Act actually worked and asked, in particular, whether foreigners, especially refugees, could be denied entry to Norway by the border police and turned back and what recourse procedure was available to them. Clarification was also sought about the indication in the report that extradition could also take place outside bilateral or multilateral agreements.

69.In connection with article 4 of the Convention, it was recalled that each State party should ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law and clarification was requested on the extent to which Norway was complying with that requirement and how it dealt with the question of mental torture.

70.Referring to article 5 of the Convention, members of the Committee wished to have some clarification on whether Norway had a system of universal jurisdiction for persons who committed torture and whether it allowed convicted persons, subject to certain conditions, to serve their sentence in their home countries, as provided for by the European Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons.

71.Clarification was also requested on specific legal measures taken by Norway to implement fully articles 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the Convention.

72.In connection with article 10 of the Convention, members of the Committee recalled that training programmes were necessary not only for doctors, but also for other health personnel at all levels who had a key role to play in combating torture. It was also asked whether law faculties offered special courses which dealt with torture as a global phenomenon and approached it from the standpoint of international and domestic legislation.

73.Turning to article 11 of the Convention, members of the Committee congratulated Norway on its rules and practices with regard to the custody of persons in detention and the treatment of prisoners and requested further information on the provisions contained in the Prosecution Instructions.

74.In connection with article 12 of the Convention, members of the Committee asked for additional information on the nature of the cases referred to the "special investigative bodies" which were independent of the police and the prosecuting authority. They also asked how the special investigative bodies were set up, by whom, what their prerogatives were, why they were needed and what the role of the public prosecutors was. Members of the Committee noted that only 20 cases relating to the use of force by the police had been subjected to special investigation in Norway during the period 1988-1990 and asked for additional information in that regard. They wished to know, in particular, whether there were districts where such incidents were more common than elsewhere and whether foreigners were involved to any significant extent. With regard to the investigation of alleged police brutality in Bergen in May 1989, which had resulted in the indictment of 15 persons for having made false accusations against the police, members of the Committee wished to know whether it had been proved beyond any reasonable doubt that the persons prosecuted had intended to discredit members of the police force and what penalties had been imposed on those found guilty. Clarification was also requested on the position of the Norwegian authorities with regard to the views of Amnesty International in this matter.

75.With regard to article 14 of the Convention, members of the Committee noted that Norwegian legislation provided for financial compensation only, and in a limited amount, to victims of violence and that compensation was not granted for injury of a non-economic nature. They observed that those provisions did not meet all the requirements for compensation of victims of torture established by the Convention.

76.In connection with article 15 of the Convention, clarification was requested on whether testimonies obtained unlawfully could be admitted as evidence.

77.In his reply, the representative of the State party provided detailed information about the dualistic system in force in his country, according to which a special act was required before an international instrument became applicable in Norway. He also informed the Committee about different legal approaches recently developed by Norwegian jurists with regard to the application of international human rights instruments in domestic law. The Committee set up in 1989 to study this question had not yet submitted its report. It appeared, however, that it would propose that a number of human rights instruments should be incorporated into Norwegian law and that a high rank should be given to them in the hierarchy of legal provisions. The representative also pointed out that some provisions of the Penal Code were fully applicable to the acts referred to in article 1 of the Convention.

78.In connection with article 2 of the Convention, the representative indicated that, according to section 183 of the Criminal Procedure Act, a detained person must be brought before a judge on the day following his arrest.

79.Referring to article 3 of the Convention, the representative stated that the case of any foreigner requesting asylum at the border or invoking certain rules of humanitarian protection was referred to the Director of the Immigration Services; in any event, an asylum-seeker would not be turned back at the border. A residence permit could also be issued for humanitarian reasons. In addition, Norway had a list of countries to which foreign nationals must not be sent back. Extradition could be granted to countries with which Norway had not concluded treaties but, in such cases, it was subject to specific requirements and a final decision by the Minister for Justice.

80.With regard to article 4 of the Convention, the representative pointed out that Norwegian law made no distinction between moral and physical harm.

81.Turning to article 5 of the Convention, the representative stated that, in general, Norway implemented the principle of universal jurisdiction which was applicable to acts of torture committed abroad by Norwegian nationals, as well as to acts committed abroad by foreigners. If a person who had committed an act of torture was in danger of ill-treatment or the death penalty if he was extradited, he would be tried in Norway. The Minister for Justice had recommended that the Parliament should ratify the European Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons.

82.In connection with article 10 of the Convention, the representative mentioned that the Norwegian authorities had established a fruitful dialogue with the Norwegian Medical Association, which was particularly interested in medical ethics and torture. No special instruction on torture was provided in law faculties but, in human rights courses, considerable attention was paid to United Nations conventions.

83.Referring to article 12 of the Convention, the representative explained that the investigative body set up in connection with the alleged police brutality in the city of Bergen was responsible for investigating acts committed by members of the police or prosecution bodies in the exercise of their functions. It conducted the investigation, while the public prosecutor was responsible for bringing charges. It was presided over by a judge and has been set up to ensure that abuses by the police were investigated impartially and independently of the various police forces. Once the investigation had been completed, justice followed its normal course. He also stated that there were no statistics on foreigners who might have been subjected to police brutality or on the conduct of the police in urban as opposed to rural areas and that sufficient evidence against 11 of the 15 persons charged with false accusations against the police in Bergen had been established by the jury. The views of Amnesty International in this matter had been brought to the attention of the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

84.With regard to article 14 of the Convention, the representative explained in detail the compensation procedures available in Norway, which consisted of various mechanisms for both economic and non-economic losses. Claims for compensation could be linked with a criminal action and the amount of compensation was determined by the courts. The system for compensation by the State came into play when the offender was insolvent. The State was held responsible for unlawful injury caused by its agents and, in case of acts of torture committed by public officials, the amount of compensation would not be limited to NKr 150,000.

85.Referring to article 15 of the Convention, the representative stressed that no testimony obtained unlawfully was admissible, although there was no specific legislation on the matter.

Conclusions and recommendations

86.The Committee expressed the view that the second periodic report of Norway, which had been submitted punctually, showed what progress had been made in the implementation of the Convention in Norway since the Committee had dealt with the initial report in April 1989. Apart from a few points which had been cleared up during the discussion, the Committee felt that the only problem was the relationship between international law and, in particular, the Convention against Torture and Norwegian domestic law.

87.The Committee recommended that Norway should include a definition of torture in its domestic law and that it should explicitly characterize torture as a crime; that would make it possible to solve problems relating to universal jurisdiction. Another solution, equally acceptable, would be to make the Convention part of Norwegian domestic law.

Argentina

88.The second periodic report of Argentina (CAT/C/17/Add.2) was considered by the Committee at its 122nd to 124th meetings, on 11 and 12 November 1992 (see CAT/C/SR.122, 123 and 124/Add.1).

89.The report was introduced by the representative of the reporting State, who stated that, in accordance with article 27 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Argentina gave precedence to an international convention to which it was a party when it was in conflict with domestic law. When Argentina ratified an international instrument, the provisions immediately became applicable by domestic administrative and judicial bodies.

90.The representative also provided information on various initiatives taken by his Government with regard to the training of prison staff, changes within the legal system, new administrative measures and the provision of compensation to victims of human rights violations.

91.With regard to the training of prison officials, he indicated that the curriculum designed for them included courses on constitutional law, ethics and human rights, and public and criminal law, and that their educational programmes were placing increased emphasis on teaching tolerance and respect for human rights and dignity.

92.Concerning legislative changes, the representative stated that Act No. 23,950/91 amending Act No. 14,467 on the treatment of prisoners stipulated that no individual could be detained without a court order. If the police had sufficient reasons to detain an individual, it could do so for no more than 10 hours to check his record, as against 48 hours previously. The Code of Penal Procedure provided, inter alia, that the maximum period for which an individual could be held incommunicado had been reduced from 10 days to 72 hours. Detainees had the right to communicate with their defence counsel before being detained incommunicado. A medical examination was compulsory at the beginning of detention. The new Code of Penal Procedure also abolished the validity of "spontaneous statements" at police stations. The accused could make a statement only before a judge. The system for prison visits had been amended by the new Code, which had entered into force on 5 September 1992. The post of judge for the enforcement of sentences had been created to deal with problems in prisons, with the assistance of medical, psychological and social welfare experts who monitored conditions of detention in prison.

93.With regard to recent administrative measures, the representative made reference to decision No. 36/91, which contains a general instruction to the members of the Public Prosecutor's Office recalling that they must comply faithfully with their legal obligations with respect to the matters dealt with in the Convention. In addition, decision No. 2/92 had been adopted, under which a computerized register containing allegations of unlawful coercion had been established.

94.With regard to compensation for victims of human rights violations, the representative stated that under Act No. 24,043, compensation to victims of detention ordered by a military court had been granted to 8,200 persons. The total compensation had amounted to $700 million. Moreover, under Decree No. 70/91, pertaining to the provision of compensation to persons detained by the police, a total of $12 million was to be granted in 470 cases and half that amount had already been paid out.

95.The members of the Committee expressed their gratitude to the Government of Argentina for its timely report and to the Government's representative for his introductory statement. Nevertheless, they observed that more information was necessary on the implementation of the Convention at the provincial level and, in this connection, they requested clarification as to the awareness existing throughout the country of the State party's obligations under the Convention. In addition, they wished to know of any specific legislation or jurisprudence which had established the precedence of provisions of international instruments over those of domestic law, especially in view of information received that the Supreme Court had handed down certain judgements in which international conventions had not been given such precedence. Members of the Committee also made reference to the 1853 National Constitution and asked whether the State party intended to replace or amend it. In addition, they requested further information on matters relating to the independence of the judiciary, particularly with regard to reported shortcomings in the selection and promotion of judges, and asked whether any legislative measures were anticipated to reform such procedures. They also wished to receive further information on the effectiveness of the methods used by the Office of the Attorney General of the nation to monitor the Government's powers in matters relating to the lack of jurisdictional response to complaints about torture-related crimes. Furthermore, members of the Committee wished to know whether any national human rights institution existed in Argentina and how it was composed and what the content was of recent reports of the National Department of Human Rights of the Ministry of the Interior.

96.Members of the Committee were particularly concerned at the apparent persistence in Argentina of ill-treatment and torture practised by sections of the police and armed forces and the apparent leniency shown by the authorities towards officials responsible for acts of torture. Reference was made, in this connection, to reports received from Amnesty International and Americas Watch, particularly with regard to the 733 allegations of ill-treatment and torture for the period 1989-1991 and that such victims appeared to be young, from poor districts and frequently dark-skinned or indigenous people. Other reports provided information about confessions obtained under torture from persons who had attacked La Tablada military barracks in 1989 and allegations of ill-treatment of detainees by the police in the capital and in Chaco and Mendoza provinces. In this connection, attention was drawn to mass media reports of the death of a 17-year-old person, Sergio Gustavo Duran, at Police Precinct No. 1 in Moron, Buenos Aires. Members of the Committee observed that intensified measures were required to deal with those situations and that those measures should focus on compensation of the tortured; punishment of the torturers; and education of the public in general and police and doctors in particular.

97.Concerning the implementation of article 2 of the Convention, members of the Committee requested further information on the new Code of Penal Procedure, especially with regard to establishment of mechanisms for its application. They also noted that under that Code the period of incommunicado detention had been reduced from 10 to 3 days and they expressed concern both at the continued practice of incommunicado detention and at the inadequacy of the advance access to a lawyer as a means of protecting persons in such circumstances. In addition, members of the Committee recalled that derogations from certain provisions of the Convention were not allowed in times of state of emergency or siege, and asked for more information on the actions taken by Argentina to ensure conformity with its obligations in this regard.

98.With regard to article 4 of the Convention, members of the Committee requested further information on the punishment of torturers, especially as information contained in the report indicated that in one case the punishment provided for in article 144 (3) of the Penal Code had not been applied to the person found guilty of the crime of torture. In addition, attention was drawn to information about the participation of doctors in cases of torture and the need to punish such practitioners. Moreover, members of the Committee expressed concern as to whether the presidential pardon of October 1989, as applied to military officers who had committed human rights violations under the previous regime, was in strict compliance with the Convention. In illustration of this point, mention was made of two cases where investigations had not been pursued or where clemency had been granted before the holding of a trial.

99.Concerning article 10 of the Convention, members of the Committee emphasized the importance of introducing a medical ethics component into medical curricula as a means of preventing the practice of torture by doctors.

100.With regard to article 11 of the Convention, more information was sought as to the arrangement existing in Cordoba city by which lawyers could be present in all police stations and whether this arrangement was to be extended to other parts of the country.

101.In connection with article 12 of the Convention, members of the Committee drew the attention of the Government of Argentina to information received from Amnesty International and other non-governmental organizations on the alleged practice of torture during the period 1989 to 1991 and to their concern that some of the lower levels of the judiciary were failing to fulfil their obligations with regard to investigating into acts of torture. In this light, information was requested on the progress being made in police and judicial investigations into all those allegations.

102.Concerning article 13 of the Convention, members of the Committee sought additional information as to its implementation in practice, particularly with regard to a specific case brought before the court in the province of Mendoza.

103.With respect to article 14 of the Convention, members of the Committee requested further information on the provision of compensation to victims of torture. They also requested clarification as to whether legal provisions existed for paying compensation to the families of persons who had disappeared and to persons who had been detained and held at the disposal of the National Executive. Moreover, they asked why applications for compensation had to be submitted to the Ministry of the Interior for approval and whether judicial appeals against the Ministry's decision had been provided for. It was also stressed that, in addition to financial compensation, it was important for victims of torture to receive moral and medical compensation and treatment for the injury they had suffered.

104.Replying to the questions raised with regard to the legal framework for the application of the Convention, the representative of the reporting State explained that international conventions applied throughout the federal territory of Argentina and provincial jurisdiction was transferred to the federal level. International instruments ratified by Argentina were directly applicable in the courts in the same way as domestic legislation and took precedence over it. In addition, he explained that, under new legislation, the system in force in the city of Cordoba, whereby lawyers could be present in police stations, would be extended to all parts of the country. He also indicated that the 1853 Constitution of Argentina fully guaranteed the rights of individuals and the freedoms of citizens. Its article 18 prohibited the use of ill-treatment and torture and plans to amend that text were in the early stages. Concerning the procedure for the appointment of judges, the representative informed the Committee that judges were nominated by the executive through the Ministry of Justice and appointed by agreement of the Senate. To strengthen that procedure, a Council for the Judiciary had been set up, composed of officials who took part in the appointment and dismissal of judges. Regarding the matter of national institutions established for the protection of human rights, the representative informed the Committee that two governmental bodies existed to which non-governmental organizations and citizens could make appeals in the event of alleged violations of human rights. One was the General Department of Human Rights and the Status of Women of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Worship and the other was the National Department of Human Rights of the Ministry of the Interior. Those two bodies could refer complaints to the courts. The report of the National Department of Human Rights of the Ministry of the Interior indicated that his Government was eager to conduct more efficient investigations of cases of unlawful coercion.

105.With reference to allegations of ill-treatment and torture reported by non-governmental organizations, the representative stated that he did not have the information necessary to provide a detailed reply. However, if Amnesty International had specific offences to denounce, it should apply to the appropriate authorities so that, if enough evidence could be collected to warrant a serious investigation, the cases would be followed up in the normal way and brought before the courts. He also indicated that his Government would reply in writing to the request for clarifications about the death of Sergio Gustavo Duran. In addition, he stated that the military personnel and police officers guilty of acts of torture at La Tablada in 1989 had been tried under ordinary law because the Defence of Democracy Act did not provide for penalties for such acts. As yet, not all sentences had been handed down and the Government of Argentina would communicate all relevant information to the Committee as soon as possible.

106.Concerning article 2 of the Convention, the representative referred to the new Code of Penal Procedure and explained that the Argentinian legal system had recently been thoroughly reorganized and that the relevant organization act had established a number of new courts. He also indicated that it had been necessary to proclaim a state of siege in the country on two occasions as a result of social tensions during the establishment of a fully democratic regime. The state of siege had not laster more than 30 days and only freedoms of assembly and movement had been restricted. The state of siege had been declared only in certain regions of the country and article 4, paragraph 2, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, prohibiting derogation from certain fundamental rights, had been fully respected.

107.With regard to article 4 of the Convention, the representative indicated that he would refer to the competent authorities the question raised on the application of article 144 (3) of the Penal Code in the case mentioned in the report. He also agreed that doctors involved in cases of torture should not be allowed to go unpunished. With regard to the questions raised about the compliance of the presidential pardon of October 1989 with the provisions of the Convention, the representative stated that pardon removed the penal consequences without wiping out an offence or the infamy attached to it.

108.In connection with article 10 of the Convention, the representative informed the Committee of the ethical training provided to doctors in Argentina. He also indicated that the University of Buenos Aires had created a chair of human rights in the School of Medicine and other faculties and that Argentina was one of the most advanced countries in that regard.

109.Regarding article 11 of the Convention, the representative explained that prohibition of access to persons being held in detention applied to members of the family and other persons, not to defence counsel. The new Code of Penal Procedure, which had reduced the period during which a person could be held incommunicado, provided that the first right of a detained person was to communicate with a lawyer, within 10 hours of his arrest.

110.In connection with articles 12 and 13 of the Convention and the concerns raised as to the non-fulfilment of the judiciary's obligations in investigating into acts of torture, the representative stated that judges had to enforce the laws as from the day following their publication; a judge who failed to do so was dismissed. With regard to the case brought to court in Mendoza, the representative informed that Committee that all the senior police officers of that Province had been dismissed.

111.With regard to article 14 of the Convention, the representative stated that the families and relatives of persons who had disappeared before 10 December 1983 received tax-exempt pensions once their claims had been made to, and approved by, a competent court. To date, 5,000 persons had received such pensions. In addition, under Decree No. 70/91, a compensation scheme had been set up for persons who had been detained and held at the disposal of the National Executive and for civilians who had been detained on the orders of the military courts before 10 December 1983. Such persons could claim for the benefits of the Decree provided that they had not received any compensation as a result of a court judgement. If a claimant's case did not correspond to the conditions of compensation laid down by the law, the claimant could appeal to the ordinary courts, which were not bound by pre-established time limits for the amount of compensation to be awarded. Additionally, victims who considered the compensation to be inadequate could appeal directly to the State or court. Under article 3 of Act No. 24,043, a claimant for compensation benefit could appeal against the partial or total rejection by the Ministry of the Interior of his application within 10 days to the Federal Administrative Court, which must then rule on the matter within 20 days.

Conclusions and recommendations

112.The Committee expressed its thanks to the Government of Argentina for having submitted its second periodic report within the time period stipulated in article 19 of the Convention and for the information and clarifications provided by the representative of the State party. The Committee also expressed its appreciation for the efforts made by Argentina to improve the human rights situation in the country, in particular, in the area of laws which relate to the purposes of the Convention.

113.The aforementioned efforts notwithstanding, the Committee expressed its deep concern at the continuing vestiges of the former regime, at the disturbing use of violent methods and torture in many cases, and at the clemency and impunity enjoyed by the perpetrators of such acts contrary to the requirements of the Convention.

114.The Committee expressed the hope that the Government of Argentina would redouble its efforts to take all legislative, judicial, administrative and other measures which would be sufficiently effective to halt and prevent the practice of torture and of all cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and, where necessary, to punish the perpetrators of such acts.

115.The Committee further expressed the hope that the Government would submit to it as soon as possible the additional information requested by its members.

Ukraine

116.The Committee considered the second periodic report of Ukraine (CAT/C/17/Add.4) at its 125th meeting, on 12 November 1992 (see CAT/C/SR.125).

117.In introducing the report, the representative of the State party pointed out that an act on the validity of international agreements in Ukrainian territory had been promulgated on 10 December 1991 and that international agreements ratified by Ukraine formed an integral part of national law. He then referre