COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE OPENS THIRTY-NINTH SESSION
The Committee against Torture this morning opened its thirty–ninth session by hearing an address by a representative of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and adopting its agenda and programme of work.
Ibrahim Salama, Chief of the Treaties and Council Branch of the OHCHR, said that the issue of reform of the human rights treaty body system had continued to be a subject of debate amongst the various involved parties. The enhancement of the human rights treaty body system had also been discussed in Berlin in June 2007 at an informal brainstorming session, hosted by the Government of Germany. Discussions had demonstrated once again the need to seek ways and methods to harmonize the treaty body system and had highlighted the Inter-Committee Meeting as a vehicle to achieve this.
The issue of an effective cooperation between the treaty bodies and the Human Rights Council, particularly with the Universal Periodic Review mechanism had also been addressed by the meeting of treaty-bodies’ chairpersons held in June 2007. Mr Salama said that this meeting had reiterated the view of the Inter-Committee Meeting that the concluding observation of treaty bodies should form part of the basis of the Universal Periodic Review, while the Chairpersons had been of the opinion that the Universal Periodic Review presented a number of opportunities and challenges. The complementary and mutually reinforcing nature of the treaty body system and the future Universal Periodic Review had been underlined and the importance of a continuing dialogue in this matter had been emphasized.
Turning to the Committee’s upcoming work, Mr. Salama noted that six countries reports would be considered during the current session and that the Committee would adopt a list of issues to be addressed to State Parties whose reports would be examined next May. Australia had requested a postponement of the consideration of its third report. This would provide with time to discuss the draft general comment on article 2 of the convention. Also, since the last session, three reports had been received from Azerbaijan, El Salvador and Nicaragua, bringing to 22 the total number of reports received and awaiting consideration.
Statements
IBRAHIM SALAMA, Chief of the Treaties and Council Branch of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), in an introductory statement, said since the Committee’s last session in May 2007 a number of developments had occurred relating to the human rights treaties. The Subcommittee for the Prevention of Torture, established under the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment had held its second session in June 2007. It also had undertaken its first country visit in October to Mauritius.
The issue of reform of the human rights treaty body system had continued to be a subject of debate amongst the various involved parties, Mr. Salama said. The enhancement of the human rights treaty body system had also been discussed in Berlin in June 2007 at an informal brainstorming, hosted by the Government of Germany. Discussions had demonstrated once again the need to seek ways and methods to harmonize the treaty body system and had highlighted the Inter-Committee Meeting as a vehicle to achieve this.
Mr. Salama noted that discussions during the Inter-Committee meeting had focused predominantly on the treaty body system. Participants had recognized the need to improve and harmonize further the working methods of the human rights treaty bodies and had considered it appropriate that the Inter-Committee meeting met twice a year, with the participation of the chairpersons of the treaty bodies. The Inter-Committee Meeting would be tasked to coordinate and make recommendations for the improvement and possible harmonization of working methods. All recommendations would be developed in consultation and with the approval of all treaty bodies. An organizational session of the Inter-Committee Meeting to highlight areas requiring harmonization was being planned for the first quarter of 2008.
A note verbale had been sent recently to all Permanent Missions to the United Nations Office in Geneva recommending that the approved harmonized guidelines on reporting under the international human rights treaties, including guidelines on a common core document and treaty-specific documents, should be used by State Parties when submitting a report to any human rights treaty body. Briefings with State parties to further disseminate those guidelines and clarify issues related to their implementation were being planned by the Secretariat. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) had already adopted revised reporting guidelines for the CERD-specific document in August 2007. The Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) was also well advanced in its revision of its specific guidelines following an informal meeting hosted by the Swiss Government. Mr. Salama encouraged the Committee to consider developing and adopting a CAT-specific document.
The issue of an effective cooperation between the treaty bodies and the Human Rights Council, particularly with the Universal Periodic Review mechanism had also been addressed by the meeting of treaty-bodies’ chairpersons held in June 2007. Mr Salama said that this meeting had reiterated the view of the Inter-Committee Meeting that the concluding observation of treaty bodies should form part of the basis of the Universal Periodic Review, while the Chairpersons had been of the opinion that the Universal Periodic Review presented a number of opportunities and challenges. The complementary and mutually reinforcing nature of the treaty body system and the future Universal Periodic Review had been underlined and the importance of a continuing dialogue in this matter had been emphasized. The Chairpersons had appreciated that the findings and recommendations of treaty bodies would form part of the basis of the Universal Periodic Review and had highlighted the role of the concluding observations in this regard.
Turning to the Committee’s upcoming work, Mr. Salama noted that six countries reports would be considered during the current session and that the Committee would adopt a list of issues to be addressed to State Parties whose reports would be examined next May. Australia had requested a postponement of the consideration of its third report. This would provide with time to discuss the draft general comment on article 2 of the convention. Also, since the last session, further three reports had been received from Azerbaijan, El Salvador and Nicaragua, bringing to 22 the total number of reports received and awaiting consideration.
In the ensuing discussion a committee Expert proposed to maybe enlarge the number of Committee meetings or to add a third session of the Committee annually. An Expert asked what were the exact impacts of the Universal Periodic Review on the various treaty bodies. Mr. Salama responded that the Universal Periodic Review would not become as sort of super-body. States would just give a rapid overview presentation and this would not replace the much more complete and detailed work of the treaty bodies. Thus, it was good that the Universal Periodic Review would include information from the treaty bodies. It was noted that the Universal Periodic Review would get bigger political and media attention as its work was more broad.
For use of the information media; not an official record
CAT07023E