Committee against Torture Adopts Reports on Follow-Up to Concluding Observations, Individual Communications and Reprisals
The Committee against Torture today heard presentations of reports on follow-up to concluding observations, individual communications and reprisals, submitted under the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, before adopting each of these reports.
Bakhtiyar Tuzmukhamedov, Rapporteur on follow-up to concluding observations under article 19 of the Convention, presenting his report, said that during the period under review, the Committee had received follow-up reports from North Macedonia, Finland, Honduras, Austria, Liechtenstein, Ecuador, Türkiye, Republic of Korea, Kuwait, Colombia and Azerbaijan. In addition, on 8 May 2025, Armenia submitted comments on the concluding observations regarding the State party’s fifth periodic report. The willingness of the States parties to provide information regarding measures they had taken to implement their obligations under the Convention was welcomed and appreciated.
Mr. Tuzmukhamedov said several States had not yet supplied follow-up information that had fallen due: Bangladesh, Burundi, Cabo Verde, Chad, Congo, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Guinea, Holy See, Kiribati, Madagascar, Malawi, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Romania, Rwanda, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Spain, Sri Lanka, Syrian Arab Republic, Uganda and United Arab Emirates. The Committee continued to send reminders to these States.
During the period under review, the Committee received alternative follow-up reports from non-governmental organizations and other stakeholders in relation to the follow-up replies submitted by Azerbaijan, Burundi, Chad, Denmark (two alternative reports), Ecuador, Finland, Pakistan, Republic of Korea and Türkiye (three alternative reports).
The Rapporteur said he also communicated with concerned States parties regarding pending issues once their reports on the implementation of the concluding observations were received and assessed. Since May 2025, such communications were sent to Egypt, Finland, Liechtenstein, Honduras, North Macedonia and Austria. In addition, the follow-up replies submitted by Türkiye, Ecuador, Republic of Korea, Kuwait and Azerbaijan were currently under consideration. The second follow-up report submitted by Colombia on 18 November 2025 would be considered during the preparation of the list of issues prior to the submission of the State party’s seventh periodic report.
Mr. Tuzmukhamedov said that while no A grades (“recommendations largely implemented”) were awarded during the period under review, in 10 instances it was considered that the recommendation identified for follow-up had been partially implemented, although further action was needed. Substantive steps had been taken towards the implementation of six recommendations (grade B1) and initial steps regarding four other recommendations (grade B2). For four recommendations, the follow-up reports did not contain sufficient information to enable the Rapporteur to assess implementation (grade D). In four other instances, the State party had taken no action to implement the Committee’s recommendation or the action taken had not addressed the situation (grade C).
States parties were encouraged to provide to the Committee, along with the report on the implementation of the recommendations identified for follow-up, a voluntary plan for the implementation of all or some of the remaining recommendations included in the concluding observations. During the period under review, follow-up reports submitted by Austria and Finland included additional information on the implementation of some of the other recommendations that had not been identified for follow-up by the Committee.
Mr. Tuzmukhamedov concluded by encouraging all stakeholders to make use of the dedicated web page for the follow-up procedure, which presented recommendations identified for follow-up by the Committee; the information submitted by States parties; the public reports submitted by national human rights institutes, non-governmental organizations and other stakeholders; and a compendium of the follow-up procedure as exercised since 2003.
The Committee then adopted the report on follow-up to concluding observations.
Committee Expert Liu Huawen, Rapporteur on follow-up to communications, presenting under article 22 the individual complaints procedure, said that since the last session, the Committee had adopted decisions on eight cases concerning Morocco (three cases), Mexico, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and Finland.
On the first case concerning Morocco (CAT/C/52/D/477/2011), Mr. Liu said the Committee had found that follow-up comments and observations demonstrated partial implementation of its decision. It observed that while the State party had alleged that the medical examination performed on the complainant as part of investigations was in accordance with the requirements of the Istanbul Protocol, it had not produced any evidence to demonstrate this. Therefore, the Committee decided to keep the follow-up dialogue ongoing and invited the State party to produce evidence that demonstrated that the complainant’s medical examination was performed in accordance with the requirements of the Istanbul Protocol.
For the case concerning Mexico (CAT/C/71/D/759/2016), Mr. Liu said, the Committee had found that the follow-up comments demonstrated partial implementation of its decision. It noted with satisfaction the measures taken by the State party regarding full reparation. However, it noted that the State party had yet to initiate an impartial, thorough, effective and independent investigation into the acts of torture, with a view to prosecute, try and punish appropriately the persons found guilty of the violations. The Committee therefore decided to keep the follow-up dialogue ongoing in respect of those remedies.
Regarding the second case concerning Morocco (CAT/C/68/D/817/2017), Mr. Liu said the Committee had decided that the follow-up comments demonstrated partial implementation of the Committee’s decision. It noted that the complainant had been released and that the State party had launched an investigation into the complainant’s allegations as to his conditions of detention. However, the Committee reminded the State party of its third recommendation to provide adequate compensation to the complainant for all violations of the Convention. The Committee decided to keep the follow-up dialogue ongoing and invited the State party to provide full, adequate and fair compensation to the complainant for all the violations of the Convention found by the Committee.
Mr. Lui said that, for the case concerning Spain (CAT/C/68/D/818/2017), the Committee had found that the follow-up comments and observations demonstrated a lack of implementation of its decision. It decided to keep the follow-up dialogue ongoing and urged the State party to provide the complainant with full and adequate redress for the suffering inflicted on her; and take the necessary measures, including the adoption of administrative measures against those responsible, and give precise instructions to police officers at police stations to prevent the commission of similar offences in the future.
Regarding the case concerning Sweden (CAT/C/72/D/918/2019), the Committee had found that the follow-up comments demonstrated full implementation, as the State party had granted asylum to the complainant. Consequently, the Committee decided to close the follow-up dialogue, with a note of satisfactory resolution, Mr. Liu said.
As for the third case concerning Morocco (CAT/C/72/D/923/2019), Mr. Liu said the Committee had found that the follow-up comments demonstrated lack of implementation of the Committee’s decision. It decided to keep the follow-up dialogue ongoing and to invite the State party to re-establish full dialogue and cooperation with the Committee. It also called on the State party to initiate a new investigation into the case; provide fair and adequate compensation to the complainant for all violations found by the Committee; open an investigation into allegations of reprisals and inform the Committee about the results; and deliver the complainant’s counsel an official authorisation that would allow her to visit the complainant in prison.
Addressing the case concerning Switzerland (CAT/C/82/D/1024/2020), Mr. Liu said the Committee had found that the follow-up comments demonstrated the actions and efforts taken by the State party with the purpose of full implementation of the Committee’s decision, which was to allow the complainant to have his appeal against the decision of the State Secretariat for Migration examined by the Federal Administrative Court. However, as reconsideration of the asylum application was pending, the Committee decided to keep the follow-up dialogue ongoing.
Finally, Mr. Liu said that for the case concerning Finland (CAT/C/78/D/1052/2021), the Committee had found that the follow-up comments demonstrated full implementation, as the State party had granted asylum to the complainant. Consequently, the Committee decided to close the follow-up dialogue, with a note of satisfactory resolution.
In closing, Mr. Liu praised the States parties which cooperated with the Committee and called on all relevant States parties to implement the Committee’s decisions on individual communications completely, in a timely manner and in good faith.
The report on individual communications was then adopted. More information on individual communications assessed by the Committee can be found here.
The Rapporteur on follow-up to reprisals, Committee Expert Ana Racu, said the Committee had, over the reporting period, continued to follow closely information related to situations involving the potential risk of reprisals against individuals and civil society organizations.
In public dialogues, Ms. Racu said, certain States had openly criticised non-governmental organizations for engaging with the Committee. Such behaviours could have a chilling effect on cooperation and weaken the safe environment that the Committee strived to create. Ms. Racu called on Committee Experts to remain attentive to these tendencies. Constructive engagement with human rights defenders was an essential component of the human rights treaty body system.
Ms. Racu said the Committee had received a limited number of new allegations of threats or reprisals against complainants over the reporting period, which the Committee was following up on. In at least one case, the Committee had examined the matter and adopted respective decisions, which would be transmitted to the State party concerned.
In closing, Ms. Racu sincerely thanked the Committee’s secretariat for its efficient support and prompt cooperation for the prevention and investigation of potential reprisals over the reporting period.
The report on reprisals was then adopted.
Documents relating to the Committee’s work are available on the Committee’s webpage. Summaries of the public meetings of the Committee can be found here, and webcasts of the public meetings can be found here.
The Committee is scheduled to next meet in public on Friday, 28 November at 10 a.m. to adopt its annual report and conclude its eighty-third session.
___________
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
CAT25.014E