COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE CONSIDERS FOLLOW-UP TO COMMUNICATIONS AND CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS

The Committee against Torture this afternoon considered the issue of follow-up to concluding observations and individual communications, hearing oral presentations by Committee members Felice Gaer, Rapporteur for the follow-up to concluding observations, and Fernando Mariño Menendez, Rapporteur on the follow-up to individual communications.

Ms. Gaer, presenting her report on the follow-up to concluding observations (article 19 of the Convention), said that the Committee had established a comprehensive procedure to bring States into compliance with their obligations under the Convention against Torture. In its identification of follow-up topics, the Committee had decided to only address topics that were serious, protective and could be accomplished within one year. In order to track the progress or status of the follow-up procedure, a link had been provided on the left hand side of the homepage of the Committee’s website, which included the follow-up letters sent to individual countries.

Globally, the most frequent follow-up topic concerned what States had done to ensure prompt and impartial investigations of torture. The second most common issue of follow-up was ensuring that States prosecuted perpetrators of torture. Other follow-up topics addressed by the Committee involved the protection of women, the monitoring of detention facilities and the improvement of conditions of detention and overcrowding.

Of the 95 States parties whose follow-up reports were due at the end of the last session, 74 per cent had been submitted, which was quite a positive outcome. Ms. Gaer also pointed out that the countries that had been late in submitting their periodic reports were the same as those who did not submit follow-up reports.

The Rapporteur made it clear that the follow-up procedure was instrumental in monitoring the progress made by countries on the situation of torture. More broadly, it would be helpful if the special procedures mandate holders presented their findings in person to the Committee against Torture. In line with this strategy, it would also be valuable for the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women and the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention to come and present their findings to the Committee.

In the past, many countries received at least six or more follow-up recommendations in one year and, as such, many States were unable to comply with their follow-up obligations. A concerted effort had therefore been made to reduce the number of such recommendations and Ms. Gaer was pleased to note that, at present, of the eight countries that were under examination for follow-up, only two had received more than four follow-up recommendations.

In the ensuing discussion, several Committee members underlined the importance of establishing clear lines of communication and cooperation between treaty bodies and special procedures. While this was already happening in an ad hoc fashion, these relationships needed to be institutionalized so that the special procedure mandate holders could have a more global vision of the human rights situation in a given country. While every Committee had the independence to assess the information it received in accordance with its particular mandate, the sharing of knowledge, statistics and findings was essential and extremely easy with today’s technology.

Another Committee Expert pointed out that the Special Rapporteur on Torture used to bring the recommendations of the Committee with him to the country he was visiting. In this regard, the Committee had a duty to provide the Special Rapporteur with as much preparatory information as possible before a country visit.

Responding to some of the questions and comments made by the Committee Members, Ms. Gaer highlighted the importance of choosing the right topics for follow-up. Since the follow-up procedure was meant to be conducted within one year, it was difficult to make recommendations for a country to reform its domestic legal system, for example. That said, while it was obvious that legal reform was a critical issue that needed to be examined closely during each country’s review, it was clearly inappropriate as a follow-up topic.

Presenting the report on the follow-up to individual communications (article 22 of the Convention), Committee Expert Fernando Mariño Menendez, the Rapporteur on this topic, noted that the process of dealing with individual complaints was very slow and unfortunately a number of States continued to resist implementing some of the Committee’s decisions. Until now, only the reports were reviewed by Committees but there was now some progress in both the consideration of individual complaints and the coordination with national human rights institutions on the ground. In just one example of this positive step, the Committee on Migrant Workers would be dealing with individual complaints, showing a slow but noteworthy progress in terms of the jurisprudence of individual rights.

Mr. Mariño Menendez mentioned that in the Vienna Convention on the Interpretation of Treaties, one rule was to assess the impact of treaty obligations on domestic law. The Rapporteur apologized for his short presentation but, given the lack of support he received from the Secretariat, he was simply not in a position to report on specific individual complaints. He would, however, informally address the Committee next week with some individual complaints and would do so more formally in May of next year with all of the legal weapons at his disposal.

In the discussion that followed, one Committee member stressed the importance of following up with individual complaints. Moreover, the question of timing, specifically in terms of the duration required to address individual complaints, had not received the same weight as some other issues. Finally, it was clear that at the moment there was no one appointed by the Secretariat to assist Mr. Mariño Menendez in his work of following-up on article 22. Given that there had been someone from the Secretariat in this position previously, it was suggested that the Committee write to the Secretariat to inquire into the situation and to request that this position be filled soon.

In concluding remarks, Committee Chairperson Claudio Grossman thanked the Rapporeurs for their presentations and the non-governmental organizations for their active participation in the discussion.

When the Committee next reconvenes in public, on Friday, 19 November at 10 a.m., it will discuss its program of work for future sessions and officially close the 45th session of the Committee.

For use of the information media; not an official record

CAT10/031E