WPC* {d VeZzYx8&Ԫp,5}O+64vbVԓͪ W؄b~{MOkG#A;ETN`%lpkGۋXgu&d]2@΃(Fj}sҧty jԐƤBf8C'w'&۰ŵgJbhYob\:_YC%9QJ`R9|?Xr(1$-(tD;>NТUClG#\7@1cϕ?bXp\lB<`#»?=kK/ٙ>yz%'NoP`rţ/xCӧ3:"eDPOj#29=3@6a#73#Lm6ytmҢ-1ANƜC@2]K*CdMH'M)-&`4#UN % 0: 0' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0j 0C 0 0 0 0 0w 0G 0 0 0 0i 0D 0 0 0 0 0^ 0' 0 0 0 | 0<2 0n 0 , 0L! 0:! 0"" 0 " 0C# 0!$U>$$N)^ )w)4))* m*HP LaserJet 6P/6MP - Standard0(hH  Z6Times New Roman RegularX($UKUS.,2G+J 0_level1  X /% 9 AIQ/23  ..  2( 9 AIQ2  2D+J 0_level2   ,"9 9 AIQ,23  ..  2( 9 AIQ2  2A+J 0_level3   ) AIQ)23  ..  2( 9 AIQ2  2>+J 0_level4  ` &AIQ&23  ..  2( 9 AIQ2  2;+J 0_level5   #AAIQ#23  ..  2( 9 AIQ2  28+J 0_level6    IQ 23  ..  2( 9 AIQ2  25+J 0_level7  h IQ23  ..  2( 9 AIQ2  22+J 0_level8   IIQ23  ..  2( 9 AIQ2  2/+J 0_level9    Q23  ..  2( 9 AIQ2  2GJ 0_levsl1  X /% 9 AIQ/23  Ԁ  2( 9 AIQ2  2DJ 0_levsl2   ,"9 9 AIQ,23  Ԁ  2( 9 AIQ2  2AJ 0_levsl3   ) AIQ)23  Ԁ  2( 9 AIQ2  2>J 0_levsl4  ` &AIQ&23  Ԁ  2( 9 AIQ2  2;J 0_levsl5   #AAIQ#23  Ԁ  2( 9 AIQ2  28J 0_levsl6    IQ 23  Ԁ  2( 9 AIQ2  25J 0_levsl7  h IQ23  Ԁ  2( 9 AIQ2  22J 0_levsl8   IIQ23  Ԁ  2( 9 AIQ2  2/J 0_levsl9    Q23  Ԁ  2( 9 AIQ2  2GJ 0_levnl1  X /% 9 AIQ/23   2( 9 AIQ2  2DJ 0_levnl2   ,"9 9 AIQ,23   2( 9 AIQ2  2AJ 0_levnl3   ) AIQ)23   2( 9 AIQ2  2>J 0_levnl4  ` &AIQ&23   2( 9 AIQ2  2;J 0_levnl5   #AAIQ#23   2( 9 AIQ2  28J 0_levnl6    IQ 23   2( 9 AIQ2  25J 0_levnl7  h IQ23   2( 9 AIQ2  22J 0_levnl8   IIQ23   2( 9 AIQ2  2/J 0_levnl9    Q23   2( 9 AIQ2  6K >4heading 1     UK XXX      US   XXX6@ 34heading 3   UK XXX    US   XXX<:Default Para0GG.header   ! UK XXX US    !XXX<rr:footnote ref XXXS+\  `&Times New RomanS S+\  `&Times New RomanSXXX<00:footnote tex   UK XXX US   XXX:8page number<00:endnote text   UK XXX US   XXX<rr:endnote refe XXXS+\  `&Times New RomanS S+\  `&Times New RomanSXXX($    (B2$ !UKUS.,    0  \  `&Times New Roman  !UKUS.,  _    i  󀀀TheauthorcitestheCommitteesviewsoncommunicationNo.59/1996(BlancoAbadv.Spain), 0*% whichstatesinparagraph8.6: TheCommitteeobservesthatarticle13oftheConventiondoesnot  +p& requireeithertheformallodgingofacomplaintoftortureundertheprocedurelaiddowninnational ,`' laworanexpressstatementofintenttoinstituteandsustainacriminalactionarisingfromthe -P( offence,andthatitisenoughforthevictimsimplytobringthefactstotheattentionofanauthority -@)  _ oftheStateforthelattertobeobligedtoconsideritasatacitbutunequivocalexpressionofthe  victimswishthatthefactsshouldbepromptlyandimpartiallyinvestigated,asprescribedbythis  provisionoftheConvention.(SeeOfficialRecordsoftheGeneralAssembly,Fiftythirdsession,  SupplementNo.44(A/53/44,annexX),ReportoftheCommitteeagainstTorture.)  @ @ USUK., (, tQ+ `3|xU !UKUS.,  _  +XjXXX COMMITTEEAGAINSTTORTURE  P.R.v.Spain  CommunicationNo.160/2000 p 23November2000 P  _CAT/C/25/D/160/2000_ 0  ADMISSIBILITY  P  Submittedby:P.R.(namedeleted)      ` [representedbycounsel]  Allegedvictim:Theauthor  Stateparty:Spain  Dateofthecommunication:9February2000 `   TheCommitteeAgainstTorture,establishedunderarticle17oftheConventionagainst 0 TortureandOtherCruel,InhumanorDegradingTreatmentorPunishment,  p   Meetingon23November2000, P   Adoptsthefollowingdecision: 0 1.  TheauthorofthecommunicationisMr.P.R.,aSpanishnationalwhoclaimstobethevictim "  ofviolationsbySpainofarticles12and13oftheConventionagainstTortureandOtherCruel, #! InhumanorDegradingTreatmentorPunishment.Heisrepresentedbycounsel.TheCommittee $" transmittedthecommunicationtotheStateparty,inaccordancewitharticle22,paragraph3,ofthe % # Convention,on11April2000. p&!$  Thefactsassubmittedbytheauthor  P(#& 2.1  Theauthorclaimsthatonthenightof29October1997,atabout3a.m.,ashewaswalking 0*%( withtwocompanionsinVictoriaStreetinMurcia,heapproachedtwolocalpoliceofficerstoask  +p&) whethertheyknewofabarthatwasopensothattheycouldbuyafewdrinks.Whenoneofthe ,`'* officersrepliedthatitwasnotaproperhourfordrinking,theauthorturnedtohiscompanionsand -P(+ madeadisrespectfulremarkaboutthepolice.Thetwopolicemenimmediatelyboredownonthe -@), author,punchinghimandhittinghimwiththeirtruncheons,knockinghimdownandcontinuingto  beathimontheground.Otherlocalpoliceofficerswerecalledtothescenebythefirsttwoand  joinedinthebeating.Theythenhandcuffedhiminaverypainfulwayandtookhimtothepolice  stationin_Correos_ԀStreet,fromwhichhewaslaterreleased.Theinjuriessufferedbytheauthor  requiredmedicalattentionattheMolinade_Segura_Ԁemergencyunit. p 2.2  On31October1997,theauthorfiledacomplaintagainstthepoliceofficerswith P  InvestigatingCourtNo.1,whichwasondutyatthetime,butnoinvestigationwasconducted. @    2.3  Thepoliceofficerswhoallegedlymountedtheattackbroughtchargesagainsttheauthorthat  p  veryday,29October1997,accusinghimofinsultingofficersofthelaw.Intheircharge,they `  claimedthatat4.55a.m.theauthorofthecommunicationhadapproachedthemtoaskwhetherthere P  wereanybarsopenintheneighbourhoodUSUK.,.Thepoliceofficershadansweredthattherewerenone @  openatthathourandtheauthorhadrespondedwithinsults.Theyhadaskedforidentificationbut 0  hehadrefused,insultingthemagain.Theyhadthereuponplacedtheauthor,whohadoffered   resistance,inthepolicevehicleandhaddrivenhimtothepolicestationforidentification.    2.4  InvestigatingCourtNo.6ofMurcia,beforewhichthechargeswerebrought,  institutedaminoroffenceprocedureandsummonedthepartiestotheoralproceedings  on25November1997.Duringtheproceedings,theauthorstatedthathehadfiledacomplaint  againstthepoliceofficerswiththecourtonduty.Thejudgethereuponsuspendedtheproceedings p and,on27November,requestedInvestigatingCourtNo.1totransmittheauthorscomplaintonthe ` groundsthatithadjurisdictiontoundertaketherelevantinvestigation.Thejudgefinallypronounced P judgementon17March1998.Hecharacterizedthelanguageusedbytheauthortothepolice @ officersasaminorinsulttoanofficerofthelawandsentencedhimtoafineandpaymentofthe 0 costsoftheproceedings.Thejudgementmentionedthattheauthorandtheproposedwitnesseshad  p notappearedbeforethecourtandstatedinoneparagraphthattheauthorhadclaimedtohavebeen ` assaultedonthewaytothepolicestation.Itstatedinanotherparagraph,however,that,sinceneither P theOfficeofthePublicProsecutornortheauthororhisrepresentativehadbroughtchargesduring @ theproceedingsandsincenoevidencehadbeenadducedinsupportofthecomplaint,thepolice 0 officersshouldbeacquitted.   2.5  TheauthorappealedagainstthejudgementtotheProvincialHighCourton21April1998, "  requestingthatthejudgementshouldbesetasideandthatthefactshehadreportedtothecourton #! dutyshouldbeinvestigatedasapossibleoffenceasdefinedinarticles173to177oftheCriminal $" Codeundertheheading Tortureandotheroffencesagainsttheperson.Theauthorarguedthatthe % # investigationwouldhaverequiredtheopeningofpreliminaryproceedingsandthetakingof p&!$ statementsfromtheallegedperpetrators,thevictimandthewitnesses.Hefurtherarguedthathis `'"% allegedoffenceshouldhavebeentriedtogetherwiththefactsstatedinhiscomplaint,whichwere P(#& onnoaccount_prosecutable_Ԁbyaminoroffenceprocedure.Lastly,heclaimedthatthefailureto @)$' investigateconstitutedabreachofarticle12oftheConvention. 0*%( 2.6  TheProvincialHighCourtdismissedtheappealon17June1998.Accordingtothe ,`'* judgement,counselfortheauthor,attheoralproceedingson25November1997,hadmerely -P(+ requestedthatthecomplaintfiledbyhisclientshouldbejoinedtothatbeforethecourt.Thejudge -@), _hadaccededtothatrequest,suspendedtheproceedingsandsetanewdatefortheirresumption.The  authorhadfailedtoappearforthoseproceedingswithoutduereason.Ashehadthusfailedto  supporthiscomplaintattheappointedtime,thejudgehadhadnoalternativebuttorejectitinthe  absenceofevidencefortheprosecution.Thejudgementconcludedthatthejudicialproceedingshad  beenterminatedowingtothepartysinaction. p 2.7  Theauthorrejectstheargumentssetforthinthejudgement.Heclaimsthathedidattendthe P  proceedings,althoughhearrivedafewminuteslate,andthatthefactsreportedinhiscomplaint @  shouldhavebeeninvestigatedautomaticallyevenifnoneofthepartieshadraisedtheminthe 0  proceedings,sincetheyconstitutedcircumstantialevidenceofcriminalconduct(acomplainthaving  p  beenfiledandevidencesubmitted). `    2.8  On3July1998,theauthorfiledanamparoapplicationwiththeConstitutionalCourt, @  allegingviolationsofthefollowingprovisions:article15oftheConstitution(righttophysical 0  integrity)andthecorrespondingarticlesoftheConvention;theprovisionofarticle24ofthe   Constitutionconcerningtherighttoanappropriatelegalprocedure,sincethefactsreportedcould  notbedealtwithinminoroffenceproceedingsbutinordinarycriminalproceedingsformoreserious  offences,whichwouldnotbeprosecutedbyaninvestigatingjudge;theprovisionofarticle24ofthe  Constitutionconcerningtherighttoadversarialproceedings,since,despitethefactthatthe  judgementbytheProvincialHighCourtindicatedthattheOfficeofthePublicProsecutorobjected  totheappealandrequestedconfirmationoftheinitialjudgement,theauthorhadneverbeen p informedoftheobjectionfiledbytheprosecutorandwasthusdeniedtheopportunitytochallenge ` it;thejurisprudenceoftheCommitteeagainstTortureinrespectofarticle13oftheConvention.( +XjXh+Xj+XjXh+Xj  ($ +XjXX+Xj+XjXX+Xj  ! , )  i       P 2.9  TheConstitutionalCourtdeclaredtheappealinadmissibleinaresolutionof19January2000, 0 stating,interalia,thatthecontestedjudgementswereconstitutionallysound.Itfurtherstatedthat  p theauthorsproceduralconducthadbeenthedecisivefactorbecausehehadsimplyrequestedthat ` hiscomplaintagainsttheofficersoftheLocalPoliceshouldbejoinedtothesubjectmatterofthe P proceedings,butwithoutbringingchargesagainstthem.Theauthorsclaimthathisrighttophysical @ integrityhadbeenviolatedwasthereforecompletelyunfounded. 0  Thecomplaint  ! 3.1  TheauthorclaimsthatthefactsamounttoaviolationbySpainofarticle12ofthe #! Conventionbecausethejudicialauthoritiesfailedtoconductapromptandimpartialinvestigation $" despitethefactthattherewerereasonablegroundstobelievethatactsoftortureorilltreatmenthad % # beencommitted.Neithertheauthornorthewitnessesnorthedoctorwhohadtestifiedtotheassault p&!$ wasquestioned.Moreover,theprocedureenvisagedindomesticlegislationforthecrimeoftorture `'"% hadnotbeenfollowed. P(#&     3.2  Theauthordoesnotsharetheviewofthejudicialauthoritiesthatitwashisinactionthat 0*%( determinedtheoutcomeofthelegalproceedings.Heconsidersthattherewasaviolationofarticle  +p&) 13oftheConvention,accordingtowhichitisenoughforthevictimsimplytobringthefactstothe ,`'*  attentionofanauthorityoftheState.Article13doesnotrequiretheformallodgingofacomplaint -P(+ (astepthathadbeentakeninhiscase)oranexpressstatementofintenttoinstituteandsustaina  criminalactionarisingfromtheoffence.   &  !  UKUS.,+XjXX+Xj    !v.  TheStatepartysobservationsconcerningadmissibility!v..  .Ԍ  Ќ US.,UK.,  +XjXX+Xj  UK.,US., 'j.4.  Initsstatementof8June2000,theStatepartynotesthattheauthordidnotindicateatany `  stagethattheprocedureforseriousoffenceswastobeappliedtohiscomplaint.Onthecontrary, P  attheminoroffenceproceedingshiscounselrequestedthathiscomplaintagainstthepoliceshould @  bejoinedthereto.Thatmeansthatheconsentedtohiscasebeingdealtwithinthecontextofminor 0  offenceproceedings.CourtNo.6summonedtheauthortoattendtheminoroffenceproceedings as  p  complainantanddefendant.However,neitherhenorhiscounselturnedupfortheproceedingsat `  whichalltheevidenceandfindingsweretobepresented.Responsibilityforfailuretosupporta P  complaintandtopresentadefenceagainstchargesthereforelieswiththepersonwhofailedto @  appear.Followinghisfailuretoattend,theauthorneitherenteredapleanorsubmittedadocument 0  challengingtheminoroffenceprocedure.Itwasonlyonappealthattheauthorcomplained,forthe   firsttime,ofthefailuretoapplytheprocedureforseriousoffencestohiscomplaint.Butthatcharge  wasinconsistentwithhispreviousconductandwasalsountimely,sinceitwasnotfiledintimeor  indueform,althoughtheauthorhadenjoyedtheassistanceofcounselfromtheoutset.The  communicationshouldthereforebedeclaredinadmissibleonthegroundoffailuretoexhaust  domesticremedies.      USUK.,&  !  UKUS.,+XjXX+Xj    !6  Theauthorscomments!6L7  47Ԍ ` Ќ US.,UK.,  +XjXX+Xj  UK.,US.,6'`65.1  Theauthorreiteratesthefactthattherewasneveraprompt,seriousandimpartial @ investigationasrequiredbytheConvention,althoughhehadlodgedacomplaintwiththejudicial 0 authoritiestogetherwithamedicalreportconfirmingthathehadreceivedmultipleblowsand  p bruises.HeexplainsthattheSpanishCriminalCodemakescleardistinctionsinitsdefinitions ` betweentheseriousoffenceoftorture(art.174)andtheminoroffenceofassault(art.617).In P particular,theoffenceoftortureispunishablebyaprisontermoftwotosixyearsand @ disqualificationoftheofficialfortwotofouryears,whiletheoffenceofassaultispunishableonly 0 bydetentionforthreetosixweekendsorafine.Accordingtotheauthor,forthepurposesofthe   Conventiontheserious,promptandimpartialinvestigationrequiredshouldbeconductedinrespect ! oftheoffenceoftortureandnotthatofassault.Otherwise,theprotectionagainsttorturethatthe "  Conventionseekstoguaranteewouldbeineffective.Healsonotesthattheprocedureforserious #! offencesisdifferentfromthatforminoroffences.Intheformercase,theinvestigationiscarriedout $" byinvestigatingjudgesandtheprosecutionbycriminalcourtsorprovincialhighcourts,whilecases % # involvingminoroffencesaredecidedbytheinvestigatingjudgesthemselves. p&!$     5.2  TheauthorfurtherstatesthatthejudgementoftheProvincialHighCourtcompletely P(#& disregardedtheConventiondespitethefactthathehadinvokeditinhisappeal.Moreover,the @)$' argumentonwhichthejudgementisbasedisincompatiblewiththeConvention,whichdoesnot 0*%( requiretheinvestigationtobeconductedbythevictimhimself,especiallywhenhehassubmitted  +p&) acomplaint,adocumentwhich,accordingtotheCommitteesjurisprudence,isnotevennecessary ,`'* fortheconductofapromptandimpartialinvestigation.Lastly,theauthorconteststheStatepartys -P(+ argumentabouttheuntimelinessofthecomplaint,claimingthattheappealwasan_appropriatemeans -@), ofremedyingthelackofaserious,promptandimpartialinvestigation.TheProvincialHighCourt  demonstratedalackofimpartialitybydistortingthelegalframeworkapplicabletoacriminalact  whichtheorgansofStatearerequiredexofficiotoprosecute.Theauthorconcludesthatall  availablelegalremedieshavebeenexhausted,includingthe_amparo_applicationtotheConstitutional  Court. p     USUK.,&  !  UKUS.,+XjXX+Xj    !mD  IssuesandproceedingsbeforetheCommittee!mDD  DԌ P  Ќ US.,UK.,  +XjXX+Xj  UK.,US.,OD'P aD6.1  Beforeconsideringanyclaimscontainedinthecommunication,theCommitteeagainst 0  Torturemustdecidewhetherornotitisadmissibleunderarticle22oftheConvention.The  p  Committeehasascertained,asitisrequiredtodounderarticle22,paragraph5(a),ofthe `  Convention,thatthesamematterhasnotbeenandisnotbeingexaminedunderanotherprocedure P  ofinternationalinvestigationorsettlement.TheCommitteenotesthattheStatepartyhasobjected @  toadmissibilityonthegroundsoffailuretoexhaustdomesticremedies.USUK., 0  6.2  Itisafactundisputedbytheauthorofthecommunicationthat,atthehearing   on25November1997oforalminoroffenceproceedingsinInvestigatingCourtNo.6  inMurcia,beforewhichthecomplaintagainsthimhadbeenlodgedbythepoliceofficers  on29October1997,itwashisownlawyerwhorequestedthesuspensionoftheproceedingsonthe  groundoftheexistenceofthecomplaintlodgedbyhisclientagainstthepoliceofficers.That  complainthadbeenlodgedbeforeMurciaInvestigatingCourtNo.1,whichhadbeenondutyonthe  dayithadbeenlodged,namely31October1997.Inaddition,hehadrequested therelevant p joinder.Consequently,thejoinderoftheauthorscomplaintagainstthepoliceofficerstothat ` lodgedbytheofficersagainsttheauthor,whichwasbeingdealtwithinoralminoroffence P proceedings,wasexpresslyrequestedbytheauthor. @   6.3  Betweenthesuspendedhearingof25November1997andthenewhearingforthe  p continuationoftheproceedings,convenedbydecisionof12December1997for17March1998,the ` author,whocouldnothavebeenunawareofthefactthattheproceedingswerecontinuingin P accordancewiththeoralminoroffenceprocedure,didnot,althoughhecouldhavedoneso,apply @ forthereplacementofthatprocedurebytheordinarycriminalprocedure,whichheisnowinvoking 0 asabasisforthecommunicationsubmittedtotheCommittee.   7.  Inthelightoftheforegoing,theCommittee,inaccordancewiththeprovisionsofrule107, "  paragraph1(c),ofitsrulesofprocedure,declaresthecommunicationinadmissibleasconstituting #! anabuseoftherighttosubmitacommunicationunderarticle22oftheConvention. $" 8.  ThisdecisionshallbetransmittedtotheStatepartyandtotheauthorofthecommunication. p&!$ UK.,US.,kH_________________ P(#& =#XjXX+XjI#