COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE HEARS RESPONSE OF AZERBAIJAN

The Committee against Torture this afternoon heard the response of Azerbaijan to questions raised by Committee Experts on the second periodic report of that country on how it is implementing the provisions of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

Completing responses to a series of questions raised by the Committee members on Monday, 9 November, the delegation, which was led by Khalaf Khalafov, Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs of Azerbaijan, observed that, according to the Code of Criminal Procedure, suspects could not be held by the police for longer than 24 hours. If they were going to be arrested, they were taken to remand centres under the auspices of the Ministry of Justice. In the last six months, 5,830 persons had been held in that way. Claims that torture was systematically used on remand were simply not true. What was true was that those detained on remand were immediately given a medical exam and any injuries or complaints were registered in the appropriate log. In addition, at any point in time the remand cells could be opened for monitoring by representatives of the Ombudsman's Office or human rights non-governmental organizations. The delegation was surprised by allegations that non-governmental organizations were not allowed into the cells to monitor conditions. A representative of the non-governmental organization the Committee against Torture, who was present here today, could confirm that remand cells were open to visits by NGOs at any time, including on weekends.

The Ombudsman had a special adviser on torture and the rights of detainees, who analysed legislative texts and reviewed all the complaints with regard to torture or ill-treatment as set out in the Convention. A number of individuals had complained of torture in remand custody and in prison and all of those complaints had been referred to the Ombudsman and to the appropriate investigative bodies. In 2008, 134 human rights violations by prison authorities and law enforcement agents had been identified and a number of prison authorities and others were sanctioned. Those were not cases of torture, but human rights violations, such as improper detention, the delegation clarified. Sanctions included dismissal and demotion.

Experts then raised a number of concerns and questions. Felice Gaer, the Committee Expert serving as Rapporteur for the report, felt that there had been insufficient explanations provided as to why certain individuals in prison or on remand were not provided with adequate access to lawyers or medical attention. Moreover, despite information provided on cases investigated by the Ombudsman involving complaints against state officials, nowhere did it appear that a single case had been brought for torture, the co-Rapporteur for the report, Xuexian Wang, observed.

The Committee will submit its conclusions and recommendations on the report of Azerbaijan towards the end of the session on Friday, 20 November.

As one of the 146 States parties to the Convention against Torture, Azerbaijan is obliged to provide the Committee with periodic reports on the measures it has undertaken to fight torture.

When the Committee reconvenes at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 11 November, it is scheduled to begin consideration of the second periodic report of the Republic of Moldova (CAT/C/MDA/2).


Response of Azerbaijan

Responding to a series of questions raised by Committee Experts on Monday, 9 November, the delegation of Azerbaijan said that, with regard to human trafficking, in order to continue steps to curb such trafficking in 2009, a whole series of measures had been taken. Azerbaijan had enhanced legislation in that regard and a second National Plan to Counter Trafficking in Human Beings 2009-2012 had been adopted. The National Plan envisaged a series of activities to improve prosecution of such crimes, as well as to provide rehabilitation for victims. In addition, the Government had worked with non-governmental organizations and other civil society organizations in this area. There had been a discussion conducted by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs with 45 non-governmental organizations and a memorandum of understanding had been signed with the aim of enhancing measures to combat trafficking. Training sessions were also organized in Austria, Serbia, Finland, Ukraine and Georgia.

Regarding concrete actions in this sphere, the delegation noted that, this year, about 17 criminal groups had been identified and brought to court, while 71 victims had been identified, over 40 of them women, and some of them minors. All of the victims received social care, and some 20 of them were now undergoing professional training, while three of them had found jobs. Over the last three or four years, over 40 trafficking victims had been found jobs.

Pursuant to the European Committee's recommendations and that of this Committee with regard to torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, amendments had been made regarding the handling of persons in custody. In particular, provisions were made for a lawyer to be present and individuals were signed in upon detention, along with a signature by the examining doctor.

Regarding remands exceeding 24 hours, the delegation said that according to the Code of Criminal Procedure suspects could not be held by the police for longer than 24 hours. If they were going to be arrested, they were taken to remand centres under the auspices of the Ministry of Justice. In the last six months, 5,830 persons had been held in that way.

As for measures taken vis-à-vis police officers for human rights violations, in that connection, claims that torture was systematically used on remand were simply not true. What was true was that in the Ministry there were only temporary remand cells. Those detained were immediately given a medical exam and any injuries or complaints were registered in the appropriate log. In addition, at any point in time the remand cells could be opened for monitoring by representatives of the Ombudsman's Office or human rights non-governmental organizations.

The delegation was surprised by allegations that non-governmental organizations were not allowed into the cells to monitor conditions. They were allowed in. A representative of the non-governmental organization the Committee against Torture, who was present here today, could confirm that remand cells were open to visits by NGOs at any time, including on weekends.

Responding to queries about particular cases raised yesterday, the delegation noted that in one case, in December 2006, the individual in question had been sentenced to life in prison for murder and other crimes. He had lit a cigarette in his cell, which had set off an epileptic fit. That had started a fire. The individual had been burned and died subsequently. A thorough investigation had been undertaken, including a forensic examination that showed that the prisoner in question indeed was an epileptic and that he had died from burns. No criminal investigation was therefore opened. In another criminal case involving a treason charge, the individual was arrested and received a heavy sentence. The convict had a medical examination, but it was clear that he was suffering from a number of illnesses. He had more than once been given the opportunity to receive treatment at a special prison medical facility, which he had refused. Finally, he was sent to the hospital without his consent, where he received treatment, but he died anyway. A post mortem showed that he had suffered a serious stroke and heart attack. It was again felt that there were no grounds to open a criminal case.

Regarding the case in which it was alleged that for 15 days an individual had no access to a lawyer, the delegation noted that, despite the fact that he was accused of very serious crimes, including heading a criminal gang that had been involved in kidnapping, murders and other very serious crimes, he had received a lawyer's assistance from the moment of his arrest. In the case of the three juveniles who had murdered another juvenile in their apartment, the delegation said that following an investigation, the case was sent to the court and the juveniles had been sentenced to up to 10 years in prison. The juveniles and their parents had appealed, saying that the juveniles had been tortured by the investigators and in prison. But following separate investigations by the Public Prosecutor's Office, it was found that no violence had been used against any of those juveniles, and so no case was brought.

Finally, in the case of the drug dealer found with 200 grams of drugs in his possession, who had committed suicide in a police station by hanging himself with a wire in the toilet, an Expert yesterday had expressed disbelief that the detainee could find the wire to hang himself. However, the delegation explained that the person was only being detained and had been free to move about the regional police station.

As far as military courts were concerned, the delegation noted that they did exist and functioned completely separately. They were only competent to try cases involving military personnel.

Regarding the court for serious crimes, the delegation noted that it had been established as part of the reform of the justice system. It was a court of first instance that treated only serious and particularly serious crimes, which in the view of the Government ensured a better result for such prosecutions.

A question had been asked about how courts reacted to allegations of torture raised during trials. The Supreme Court had handed down an order stipulating that courts were obliged to react to such allegations made during the course of a trial and underscored that there could be no mitigating circumstances whatsoever for acts of torture. Courts had to refer evidence of torture to the Public Prosecutor's Office immediately and a investigation had to be opened as a matter of course.

On proof of torture, the delegation said that all evidence gathered in a criminal investigation had to be assessed in their entirety to be sure that there was sufficient evidence. Sufficient evidence meant that there was an adequate volume of evidence that allowed for a reliable conclusion to be made to determine guilt.

Concerning review of procedural methods, the Code of Criminal Procedure was very specific in setting out the manner of interrogations and investigations. The right to a defence was also very strictly guarded. Witnesses and victims had the right during interrogations to have a legal representative present, and there were 13 cases in which a lawyer's presence was mandatory. Electronic recording of interrogations provided a further guarantee against torture.

On universal jurisdiction, the delegation noted that, under the Criminal Code, citizens of Azerbaijan and others who had committed war crimes or crimes against humanity bore criminal responsibility regardless of where such crimes were committed.

Turning to the issue of new remand facilities for persons under investigation, the delegation enumerated a number of new facilities that had been opened, including a compound in Baku. All those new facilities had state-of-the-art facilities, including medical facilities that would make many hospitals jealous. The members of the Committee were invited to come and see the new facilities.

As for women in conflict with the law, the delegation said that there were 109 women on remand at present, the largest number (39) for crimes related to trafficking in persons, and then to a lesser degree for crimes relating to drugs, forgery, murder, grievous bodily harm, theft and robbery and only four for sexual offences or other crimes. There were 33 women working in the prison for women, making up about 80 per cent of the total staff. In every detention facility, however, there was a female medical staff member who would carry out a bodily search of a female detainee, if needed.

On the 9,000 persons who had been freed in March under an Amnesty Act, the delegation did not have specific statistics on the crimes committed by those persons. However, amnesties could not be accorded to those who had committed grave crimes.

Concerning activities of the National Security Ministry, the delegation noted that that Ministry was responsible for particularly grave crimes, such as espionage and terrorist acts. It was vital that the Ministry had its own remand cells to protect any information from leaking that could impact negatively on the work of the Ministry. Those remand facilities were open for inspections by the Ombudsman's Office, representatives from the Government, and others.

The Ombudsman had a special adviser on torture and the rights of detainees, who analysed legislative texts and reviewed all the complaints with regard to torture or ill-treatment as set out in the Convention. A number of individuals had complained of torture in remand custody and in prison and all of those complaints had been referred to the Ombudsman and to the appropriate investigative bodies. In 2008, 134 human rights violations by prison authorities and law enforcement agents had been identified and a number of prison authorities and others were sanctioned. Those were not cases of torture, but human rights violations, such as improper detention, the delegation clarified. Sanctions included dismissal and demotion.

The Ombudsman would continue to monitor compliance with legislation in this area, as the State body identified to carry out the role of the national preventive mechanism, under the Optional Protocol to the Convention, the delegation added.

As for new legislative instruments in this area, The Government was currently considering whether to ratify the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the delegation concluded.

Further Questions by Committee Experts

FELICE GAER, the Committee Expert serving as Rapporteur for the report of Azerbaijan, said she was still looking for a lot of answers, as well as clarifications. Regarding cases in which individuals complained that they were denied a lawyer or that access to a lawyer or medical personnel was hindered, Ms. Gaer noted that in its explanations today the delegation had largely explained that those were not nice people, that they were criminals. However, what she had not heard was why they had been denied access to lawyers or other services. She had not heard why an individual was denied the right to have access to a lawyer of their own choosing for 15 days. In the case where an individual was denied the right to medical attention, she had not heard how the individual had the right to ensure that such attention would be provided. As for the epileptic who had suffered burns from which he died, the Committee had heard that that individual had been denied medical care for 11 hours following the incident. So what went wrong?

On registration of detainees, Ms. Gaer had heard an answer, but she did not hear if all of the recommendations of the European Committee against Torture had been incorporated.

Despite the assurances of the delegation yesterday that the Public Committee for Penitentiary Institutions could inspect places of detention unannounced, Ms. Gaer had information directly from the Public Committee that they had to go through administrative procedures before they could make such visits and that the process took 24 hours.

On the issue of universal jurisdiction, Ms. Gaer clarified that the question was not whether it existed, but whether there were actually any prosecutions of individuals for acts of torture committed outside Azerbaijan.

Regarding prosecutions for torture, Ms. Gaer asked if there had been a single case of a police officer found guilty and criminally punished under provisions for torture in the Criminal Code?

Finally, Ms. Gaer asked about the minimal monitoring requirements for cases where persons were expelled from the country on the basis of diplomatic assurances.

XUEXIAN WANG, the Committee Expert serving as Co-Rapporteur for the report of Azerbaijan, said that in the context of the number of cases investigated by the Ombudsman, the delegation had said today that those were not for "serious offences" but for human rights violations. The report also set out instances of cases brought against the authorities. However, nowhere had he found a single case brought for torture. He would appreciate knowing if that was the case. He also reiterated his concern about the new laws that restricted the activities of non-governmental organizations, including those involved in monitoring complaints of torture and ill-treatment.

Response by Delegation

Responding to some of the additional questions raised, the delegation of Azerbaijan said that, with regard to non-governmental organizations, the amendments to the NGO law before Parliament that concerned NGOs had not been discussed. That amendment was deferred and the current law was still in place.

As to whether there had ever been a case of torture brought in the court or evidence found in the courts of torture, the delegation did not have any information on that. However, no court had ever thrown out evidence of torture as far as they knew.

On all complaints against law enforcement personnel in the context of the elections, those had been taken to court and prosecuted.

Cases referred to in the original presentation had not been torture cases but cases of domestic violence. Those cases had been tried and the perpetrators punished, if they had been found guilty, the delegation said.

As to the suggestions that Azerbaijan needed to reconsider and reformulate its laws on torture, those concerns would be brought back to the Government for action.

Regarding comments that there were impediments to access to a lawyer in certain cases, the delegation expressed dismay that those questions had been reverted to. They had already explained that those individuals had been provided with lawyers. Similarly, with regard to the person who allegedly did not receive medical attention, that person had replied in writing several times that he did not want medical attention when it was offered. Nevertheless, eventually he had been transferred to the medical facility, where he did receive treatment.


For use of the information media; not an official record

CAT09031E