COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE CONSIDERS REPORT OF ECUADOR

The Committee against Torture has concluded its consideration of the combined fourth to sixth periodic report of Ecuador on the efforts of that country to give effect to the provisions of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

Introducing the report, Alexandra Moncada, Assistant Secretary of the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights of Ecuador, noted that the Truth Commission was set up by the Government in response to groups of victims whose rights were violated. On 7 June 2010 the Commission presented a final report that described and analyzed the grave human rights violations committed in the country between 1984 and 1988 against 456 victims. Ms. Moncada said that the consequences of these violations of human rights on the lives of victims and their families should be considered as part of the history of the country. The Truth Commission had also initiated a process to disseminate the contents of its report throughout the country on a national level reaching approximately 2,000 persons in cities ranging from Quito to Riobamba.

Turning to social rehabilitation, Ms. Moncada said that concrete efforts had been made to improve the conditions in detention facilities in coordination with the Ministries of Health, Education and the National Directorate of Social Rehabilitation. A state of emergency had been declared in the penal system and new centres of social rehabilitation had come into operation in Santo Domingo and Archidona.

Serving as Rapporteur for the report of Ecuador, Committee member Claudio Grossman raised a number of issues including whether Ecuador effectively applied the law regarding detention time by referring all cases to a judge within 24 hours and whether there were any statistics on this. In terms of refugees, Mr. Grossman wanted to know how people were expelled from the country and if refugees were entitled to have a lawyer for the proceedings and could they go to a judge or appeal to a court if they objected to their deportation. Mr. Grossman also outlined reported cases of torture of prison detainees who claimed to have been tortured when they complained about prison conditions and he asked if the delegation could provide more information on these cases of alleged torture.

Fernando Marino Menendez, the Committee Chairperson serving as Co-Rapporteur for the report, asked for further details about the rights of indigenous peoples and whether there were some cultural practices that could be considered as torture. He also asked about reports of violence in the border region between Ecuador and Colombia, gender based violence and the rehabilitation of prisoners and whether they were ever held in isolation for long periods of time. Other Committee members asked about sexual violence in schools, the rule of law in the country, convictions for torture, planned follow-up to the Truth Commission’s findings, and the status of asylum seekers, particularly child asylum seekers.

The Ecuadoran delegation included representatives from the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry for the Coordination of Internal and External Security, the Ministry of Defence, the National Court of Justice, the National Assembly of Ecuador, the Truth Commission, and the Permanent Mission of Ecuador to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

Ecuador is among the 147 States parties to the Convention and as such it must present periodic reports to the Committee on how it is implementing the provisions of the Convention.

When the Committee reconvenes at 3 p.m. it will begin its consideration of the second periodic report of Cambodia (CAT/C/KHM/2).

Report of Ecuador

The combined fourth to sixth periodic report of Ecuador (CAT/C/ECU/4-6) notes that the Ecuadorian State has taken a number of steps to reduce the use of pretrial detention. First, detención en firme was declared unconstitutional. Second, oral remand hearings [audiencias de control de flagrancia] were established by the resolutions adopted by the former Supreme Court of Justice. The third step was the recent reform of the Code of Criminal Procedure, carried out on 17 March 2009. The fourth was the establishment of the Interim Public Criminal Defence Unit.

In the context of the state of emergency in the prison system the national Government implemented the Transitional Management Unit for the Public Criminal Defence Service as a de-concentrated, administratively and financially independent agency attached to and dependent on the Office of the President of the Republic. Its purpose is to defend people who have been charged with or accused of a crime or offence when their financial and social situation means they are unable to retain their own counsel to provide them with legal assistance and may therefore face the prospect of pretrial detention.

The Ecuadorian State takes immediate and appropriate action to deal with complaints of human rights violations in the prison system, with the National Social Rehabilitation Service conducting investigations and ensuring that due process is followed; the appropriate administrative sanctions are applied where appropriate. The Ecuadorian Ombudsman’s Service is also assisting with the work of ensuring that human rights violations do not occur at prison facilities, in compliance with the requirement in article 215 (4) of the Constitution to prevent and halt any cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, in accordance with letter I of article 8 of the Organic Act of the Ombudsman’s Service.

To resolve the Committee’s concern about allegations of torture and ill-treatment of minorities, the Council for the Development of the Nationalities and Peoples of Ecuador reports that from 2001 to the present, the National Bureau for the Defence of Indigenous Peoples’ Rights, now the National Commission for the Human Rights of Indigenous Peoples, has considered and processed only three cases of ill-treatment. One concerned indigenous migrants working in large cities and experiencing ill-treatment at the hands of metropolitan police security personnel, another concerned people being assaulted because of alleged disrespect for authority, and the third concerned ill-treatment of demonstrators from indigenous communities in popular protests.

The National Constituent Assembly introduced a novel provision into the current Constitution to allow appropriate and effective measures to be taken for the benefit of torture victims. Article 78 establishes the importance of providing comprehensive redress for such people on a number of fronts, which is a great step forward in Ecuadorian legislation.

Presentation of Report

MAURICIO MONTALVO, Permanent Representative of Ecuador to the United Nations Office at Geneva, introduced the delegation, which he said represented the diversity of the Ecuadorian State.

ALEXANDRA MONCADA, Assistant Secretary of the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights of Ecuador, said that over the last year Ecuador had continued the process of ensuring that the legislation of the country was harmonized with the constitutional framework in place to combat torture, abuse of power and impunity.

The Truth Commission was set up by the Government in response to groups of victims whose rights were violated. On 7 June 2010 the Commission presented a final report that described and analyzed the grave human rights violations committed in the country between 1984 and 1988 against 456 victims. Ms. Moncada said that the consequences of these violations of human rights on the lives of victims and their families should be considered as part of the history of the country. The Truth Commission had also initiated a process to disseminate the contents of its report throughout the country on a national level reaching approximately 2,000 persons in cities ranging from Quito to Riobamba.

Ms. Moncada said that the Commission had determined the existence of civil, penal, and administrative responsibility and the Ecuadorian Government had established a Special Unit to look into the cases studied by the Commission. To date there were eight bodies that had finished the first stages of training people in the appropriate procedures and international legislation so that they could begin widening the number of cases they could hear. Various cases had been reopened and investigated by the Truth Commission and this in turn had led to the arrest of various members of police special bodies and the beginning of relevant trials. In order to ensure that members of the armed forces operated within the framework of civil liberties and human rights, the State had developed various training programmes aimed at preventing torture and the violation of human rights.

Ms. Moncada said that Ecuador had undertaken a number of reforms, including the reforms to the Penal Code, the Procedural Penal Code, and the law of the Public Ministry. In May 2010 the State created the Investigations Unit of the Ministry of the Interior to establish an interdisciplinary approach to the process of police reform.

Turning to social rehabilitation, Ms. Moncada said that concrete efforts had been made to improve the conditions in detention facilities in coordination with the Ministries of Health, Education and the National Directorate of Social Rehabilitation. A state of emergency had been declared in the penal system and new centres of social rehabilitation had come into operation in Santo Domingo and Archidona.

In closing, Ms. Moncada made reference to the grave events that had taken place in Ecuador at the end of September 2010 when some members of the national police, upset at the passage of the law of Organic Public Service, stormed police barracks in different cities and paralyzed security services, and intended to take the National Assembly and disrupt the constitutional order of Ecuador. As a result of these attacks, 6 people were killed and 270 people were injured. There were 11 people who were still convalescing in state hospitals.

The State of Ecuador was investigating human rights violations that took place on 30 September and the State was investigating those people who participated in the armed revolt. Ms. Moncada said Ecuador had the obligation to investigate and sanction those responsible for human rights violations as well as violations to the health, security and integrity of citizens. The State had also initiated the process of reparations to the victims and their families.

Ms. Moncada concluded by saying that Ecuador would maintain its decision to eradicate the practice of torture, cruel and inhuman treatment, and impunity.

Questions Raised by Committee Experts

CLAUDIO GROSSMAN, the Committee Expert serving as Rapporteur for the report of Ecuador, began by outlining the positive measures that had been implemented by Ecuador including the compensation of victims and the reduction in detention times of those accused of crimes.

Mr. Grossman wanted to know how the penal code reform was advancing as the code read like something from the Inquisition, with references to corporal punishment and the like. What about torture of a psychological nature? Mr. Grossman said that the difficulties stemming from impunity could be seen in the country as well.

Ecuador was the seventh leading country in terms of refugee populations and this was a huge problem for a developing country. Mr. Grossman also wanted to know whether those accused of drug trafficking were subject to rough treatment and torture, as had been reported. Did Ecuador effectively apply the law regarding detention time by referring all cases to a judge within 24 hours? Were there any statistics on this?

Mr. Grossman said it was unclear whether all the legal measures that had been taken by the State had led to a decrease in the number of people detained before going to trial. Could the delegation please provide more information on this matter?

What was the distribution of resources for the Office of the Ombudsman? How did the participation of civil society function in the country? It was not overlooked that the police now had to read people their rights upon arrest or detention. Thirty three per cent of prisoners polled said their rights had not been read to them, so what sanctions were in place for those police officers who failed to read the card to detainees? What training was provided to police to inculcate this practice in them?

Mr. Grossman said in terms of children’s rights, when were they allowed to have an adult with them if they were accused of a crime? Did adults show up as soon as a child was charged or did they come later in the process?

In terms of refugees, how were people expelled from the country? Were refugees entitled to have a lawyer for the proceedings and could they go to a judge or appeal to a court if they objected to their deportation? What were these procedures? The training of national police in this regard was also important. Were these people subject to torture or ill treatment or violence?

Mr. Grossman also outlined reported cases of torture of prison detainees who claimed to have been tortured when they complained about prison conditions. Could the delegation provide more information on these cases of alleged torture?

FERNANDO MARINO MENENDEZ, the Committee Chairperson serving as Co-Rapporteur for the report, began by touching on the situation of indigenous peoples in Ecuador. He wanted to know whether the coordination law between indigenous peoples and the Government had been approved and what were the principles driving it? Was the Convention applied in this agreement? The law stated that cultural practices could not be considered torture because they were not committed by officials, so how did the State define the extent to which indigenous people had the right to enjoy their cultural practices and when did these cultural practices violate human rights?

In the border area with Colombia, it seemed there had been recurrent acts of extreme violence which had led to armed intervention, including by the army. This had led to people seeking asylum or refugee status. The laws of Ecuador were generous in this regard. Mr. Menendez had several questions regarding this situation, including whether the Ecuadorian Government was in contact with the Colombian consulate regarding Colombian citizens who had crossed the border. Also, what was the legal status of asylum seekers? Did they have the right to work? What about children who were asylum seekers? There were reports of the sexual exploitation of children of asylum seekers so what system was in place to ensure their rights and to make sure they were protected from child labour or forced labour; was ILO Convention 182 applied in such cases? What role did the Office of the Ombudsman play in the protection of children and did it have the resources and instruments to protect these rights? Were asylum seekers asked if they had a criminal background and if so, did the delegation think this was appropriate given their situation of vulnerability?

In terms of gender based violence, what was being down to combat this? There had been reports of violent rape of women on the border of Colombia by police, soldiers and other border officials.

What was the rehabilitation policy of the State and what concrete rehabilitation measures were undertaken to give inmates the tools to leave prison and reintegrate into society? Also, were prisoners ever held in isolation, because the Committee considered this as coming very close to inhuman treatment? What was the case in Ecuador and how long could people be held in isolation? What would be the follow-up to the Truth Commission?

Other Committee Experts asked questions related to corporal punishment and asked the delegation to outlaw corporal punishment of children in the home and in alternative care settings. A Committee member said there seemed to be several examples of there being no legal safeguards against involuntary hospitalization, coercion and violence against people in State run facilities. There were also disturbing reports of sexual violence in school against girls, sometimes by teachers and principals who should protect them. Rape seemed to be a problem of great magnitude and the number of reported rapes had grown extensively according to the report. This was a good sign in the sense that people were reporting these cases. The number of cases taken to court and convictions was still rather low. What was being down to prevent and punish rape and rehabilitate the victims?

What was being done to investigate the murder of a doctor in Ecuador who had reported cases of torture?

Another Committee member asked about conditions in prisons and places of detention such as overcrowding. Were measures that had been taken to reduce overcrowding not sufficient? How was the independence of doctors who were tasked with evaluating prisoners guaranteed if they were working for healthcare facilities run by the prison? Who employed these doctors? In a survey of 166 prisoners conducted by a non-governmental organization, 41 per cent said they had been subjected to torture. How did the State reconcile this with the low number of torture complaints received during the same period? Were the visits of the Ombudsman to places of detention announced or unannounced?

Another Committee Expert said that there were reports of an ambush of indigenous peoples in May 2010 and their requests for police protection were denied. Could the delegation confirm the content of these reports?

The next speaker noted that there had been no convictions for torture in Ecuador, but there were indications that people had been convicted of “crimes against life” and more often than not fined rather than being convicted of jail time. How large were these fines and how long was the jail time, if any? There was also something called a “friendly settlement” for the crime of torture. What could this constitute? Could the delegation provide an update on the human rights defender Ester Landeta? The Special Rapporteur who visited the country noted in his report that the homicide rate was growing and the impunity was astounding. He also mentioned lynchings by lawless mobs. How did this relate to the rule of law and why were citizens taking the law into their own hands? Was it because of the absence of law enforcement or frustration? The Special Rapporteur noted in his report that he did not see evidence of extrajudicial killings by police, but there were reports of individuals who had been tortured to death and shot by law enforcement during operations. Could the delegation elaborate on this? The Committee member also asked the delegation how many cases of sexual violence in schools were actually reported to police each year, how many had gone to court, were there any convictions and what were the punishments?

CLAUDIO GROSSMAN, the Committee Expert serving as Rapporteur for the report of Ecuador, concluded the questions by asking what was going on with the military court while it was in legal limbo. Was it functioning at all? Also, what was happening in terms of capacity building for border police? Had training programmes been undertaken and if so how many people had been trained? Has the manual that was created for law enforcement officials been distributed to concerned parties?

Response by Delegation

ALEXANDRA MONCADA, Assistant Secretary of the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights of Ecuador, said they were delighted by the questions that had been put to the delegation because it showed how concerned and interested the Committee was in what was happening in Ecuador. The delegation looked forward to answering the Committee’s questions and telling the members about the progress that had been made in the country.

In responding to the questions raised by Committee members, the delegation began by addressing the questions surrounding general legal issues related to torture. In terms of characterizing the crime of torture, the delegation said that in May 2010 the Military Penal Code was drawn up and the law reforming the Penal Code was promulgated to characterize crimes committed by police and military forces. Such reforms stressed that there was no impunity for crimes such as torture, extrajudicial killings or enforced disappearances and set sentences between 12 and 16 years in prison. There was also a draft law on the compensation for victims of such crimes that had been tabled in the first half of 2010.

The delegation said that torture had not been properly characterized in legislation in the past and the State was in the process of doing that. Therefore, some lawyers had decided to prosecute the crime as a crime against the life of an individual to prevent people from enjoying impunity. This was not sufficient, however because the sentences handed down were often very light and did not reflect the gravity of the crime.

The rights pertaining to international treaties did not have to be written into domestic law once the treaties were ratified. The rights of such treaties were immediately applicable in the State once the treaty was adopted. These rights enjoyed full legal status and thus people could not say that the law did not apply to them or they were unaware of it or there was no corresponding domestic law.

The delegation went on to say that there was no restriction on the guarantees of due process for drug traffickers. Nevertheless, because of the impact of this crime across the world Ecuador did not apply things such as reduction in sentences as could be done in the case of other crimes. In terms of detention times, an accused person had to be brought before a judge or magistrate within 24 hours of arrest. As of October 2010 there were 497 persons held in provisional detention centres and there had been a marked reduction in the percentage of people detained in such detention centres. This was the first time that the State had collected data on this population.

The delegation said it was important to understand that the State worked with the victim to define the compensation for torture and to reach agreements with their full understanding. This was not to avoid punishing perpetrators, but rather to provide an agreement that suited the victim. Cases could be reopened, particularly if there was new information brought to light. The State had also undertaken specialized training courses for law enforcement officials in investigation and interrogation techniques which involved two months of intensive training. A unit for the investigation of human rights violations had been set up and it was an interdisciplinary team that looked at such things such weaknesses in the system, vulnerable groups, and why these groups were vulnerable in order to prevent the occurrence of human rights violations. The unit was set up in 2010 and thus far had dealt with 180 cases and it was investigating 45 cases from the past that had been identified by the Truth Commission as representing grave human rights violations including extrajudicial killings and forced disappearances.

In terms of the judicial structure, the delegation said that the Office of the Ombudsman was under the judiciary and represented an increased access to justice for those who did not normally have access to the courts. The Office had heard more than 39,000 cases and its work had led to a reduction in prison overcrowding because people had access to public defenders and were not being held without being sentenced for crimes. Thus, there had been a call to increase the resources of the office and to hire more public defenders to increase the number of public defenders from the current number of 127.

Questions had been raised about the role of the Attorney General and the police and the delegation said that the Attorney General had a judicial police force made up of specialized personnel to investigate and gather information for the prosecution of crimes committed by public officials. The police were responsible for gathering and keeping all evidence for trial and for preventing the flight of those accused of crimes. In the last year, more than $4 million had been invested in modernizing the equipment and labs of the judicial police. In terms of employing private firms to provide public defenders, there were currently not many private firms in Ecuador which provided such services so the State did not use such outside contractors.

Regarding the Truth Commission and its future, the delegation said the mandate of the Commission had been extended and the delegation hoped this would guarantee a transition of information to the Attorney General to guarantee a follow-up mechanism to the findings of the Commission, mainly to provide compensation to those victims. The draft law for the compensation of victims had been presented to the legislature last year and was being debated by the body so the hope was that next year there would be legislation relating to this matter.

With regards to social rehabilitation, the number of people currently detained whose cases had not gone to trial was 501 persons. No adolescent could be left incommunicado. From the moment of detention an adult was notified and could intervene on behalf of a child. In terms of rehabilitation for prisoners, policies for social inclusion and training for those detained were carried out and special attention was provided to certain groups such as adolescents to lessen the negative effects of prisons. The training and professionalization of prison staff and the improvement of infrastructure were some of the ways in which the State had tried to improve conditions in prisons as well as improvements in medical care and areas for studying and training. The delegation said it was addressing the problem of overcrowding by creating new social rehabilitation centres in places where they did not exist before as well as the extension of the existing penitentiary infrastructure.

On the issue of the medical staff in prisons, the Ministry of Justice worked in coordination with the Ministry of Public Health in order to provide medical care in prisons. According to the finding of an non-governmental organization that 41 per cent of prisoners polled had been tortured, the prisons followed allegations of torture and thus far they had two allegations of torture in an adolescent detention centre and the officer involved had been dismissed and there were three other cases under investigation at other male adolescent detention centres. Perhaps the non-governmental organization had different numbers because they were basing their research on interviews whereas the Government was basing its numbers on actual complaints filed.

The Ombudsman carried out inspections of social rehabilitation centres; these were both surprise visits and those that took place with prior notification. The Ombudsman then filed a report with recommendations and observations.

The delegation then turned to the situation on the border between Ecuador and Colombia. The situation was influenced by the production of cocaine and the situation of armed conflict in Colombia. Illegal groups constantly moved back and forth between the two borders to traffic drugs and people as well as carry out extortion and other crimes. This led to constant violence as groups competed for business and territory. People in these areas were vulnerable and massive displacement was an issue as Ecuador had received more than 135,000 Colombian citizens escaping the violence in their communities. There was an extended registry of these refugees which had helped with the visibility of these people and the acknowledgement of their rights. Under no circumstances would these people be returned to their country. The State had started and carried out with success a process of training to all the police officers in the northern part of the country focusing on human rights and refugee rights. The State had also established behavioural standards for those officials who came into contact with these populations. In terms of statistics, the extended registry showed that there were more than 27,000 persons in the country who had refugee status and these numbers were disaggregated by age and gender. Refugees enjoyed the same rights as citizens. The deportation procedure was an administrative one and it was subject to appeal.

Turning to the issue of sexual violence, the delegation said the State had two specialized units in the national police, one of which focused on children and adolescents and another which focused on interfamily violence. The State was also putting into practice programmes to address gender based violence in the border region with Colombia to provide more effective replies and greater protection of vulnerable groups and victims.

The delegation said that refugees as well as those seeking refugee status had the right to work and refugee children enjoyed all the rights that other children enjoyed in Ecuador. The delegation said that there was an exception for those refugees with criminal backgrounds.

A number of questions had been asked about the police and the armed forces, and the delegation said these groups were trained in human rights and they gathered information on alleged human rights violations. Regarding military justice and the Organic Law in National Defence, military judges received training in the role they would need to play and their jurisdiction and territorial responsibilities for the exercise of their roles was being determined as well. There was an internal affairs office in the police department for internal oversight, and it had been strengthened to provide the greatest possible effectiveness and transparency.

The delegation said that in terms of deaths resulting from torture or abuse at the hands of the police, 118 such cases were under investigation by the Attorney General’s office and the provisional arrest of 16 police officers had been ordered. The delegation hoped the appropriate sanctions would be handed down soon. Special military and police courts would judge crimes that were committed as part of a specific mission. Military judges were responsible for judging crimes committed by members of the armed forces, but after the reform of the Military Penal Code these courts now operated as part of the larger judiciary and they had closed their separate facilities.

As part of the capacity building programme for the national police, a training manual had been drawn up with the help of civil society, church groups and non-governmental organizations which covered a wide range of human rights topics including trafficking and discrimination. There were 100 trainers who provided continuous training throughout the country and all 40,000 members of the national police force had to be familiar with the manual and trained in its contents by the end of 2010.

Turning to indigenous justice and how this worked with the Convention against Torture, the delegation said that it recognized that the limits of indigenous justice were human rights to be enjoyed by all. The constitution stated that while respecting the indigenous cultures, the application of indigenous justice had to respect the constitution and international human rights instruments. There was also a draft law aimed at ensuring that due process was followed in the application of indigenous justice and that these cultural practices were also in keeping with human rights. The State did not support the acts of the rural defence boards and other bodies set up to maintain order in certain regions. These were not State bodies. The Ecuadorian State was working hard to reduce the perception that people were unsafe which had led to panic and fear at a local level. These psychological factors had to be addressed in addition to building the capacity of community police units.

With regards to the extraction of oil from indigenous lands of the Sarayacu community, the State had held various meetings with the Sarayacu about the exploration and extraction of oil from their lands and surrounding areas and they had agreed on environmental concerns and the principle that the community would also benefit from any oil found on their lands.

The delegation also updated the Committee on the cases of 29 people who had been deprived of their liberty at the Rehabilitation Centre of Guayaquil. These people were given access to the justice system to pursue their allegations of abuse and ill-treatment and currently, these people were in a secure location in Guayaquil and they had not been subject to torture or ill-treatment. The delegation also gave the Committee updates on other allegations of torture such as the cases of Cedeno Yorgi, Leidy Velez, Paul Guanuna, German Ramirez and Ivan Muela. These cases were in various stages of investigation.

The delegation informed the Committee that human rights were not suspended during the period of unrest and the state of emergency surrounding the events of 30 September.

Turning to the cases of sexual violence in the education system, the delegation said that Ecuador had provided $2.5 million for guaranteeing training and prevention in matters of sexual violence against boys and girls in the educational system and they had also undertaken to educate boys and girls in various provinces about their rights. Certain provinces were chosen for this campaign because there was data showing that the prevalence of sexual violence in these areas was higher than in other parts of the country. Concerts and dramas were staged as part of this prevention and education campaign and the country had to redouble its efforts to combat this problem.

Follow-up Questions by Committee Members

CLAUDIO GROSSMAN, the Committee Expert serving as Rapporteur for the report of Ecuador, said that the Committee valued what was happening in Ecuador today and the changes taking place there now. There was however the issue of the definition of torture and the Committee always insisted that the provisions of the treaty be incorporated into the penal code and other domestic laws to ensure a strong application of the laws. Mr. Grossman wanted to know if there had been any cases of direct application of the Convention against Torture.

The Rapporteur asked what mechanism had been set up to fulfil the standards that had been adopted regarding people getting a hearing within 24 hours of detention. In how many cases had there been complaints, follow-up on those complaints and sanctions due to non-fulfilment of the requirement for people to receive a hearing within 24 hours of arrest? One had to assume that there would be a certain level of non-compliance when new laws were introduced so one had to develop the mechanisms for complaints and dealing with these complaints.

In terms of people who had been detained without sentencing, Mr. Grossman wanted to know the percentages of reduction in the number of people who were detained without sentencing. He felt it was very important that Ecuador was trying to address this issue, but it would be helpful to have comparative figures.

Mr. Grossman expressed concern about the so-called “friendly agreements” in which cases of torture were resolved, usually without the perpetrator serving jail time, but in which the State admitted fault. He wondered whether some of these solutions led to impunity, and he noted that one person punished could serve better than a thousand training sessions in setting an example of the State’s position on torture.

The Rapporteur noted the increase in public defenders and asked for additional information on the resources the public defender’s office had as well as resources for the Office of the Ombudsman. Could complaints be launched against the public prosecutor’s office?

He also asked about the draft bill that would be tabled regarding the compensation of torture victims as it would be interesting to see what was being developed in this area. In terms of refugees, there seemed to be a difference between the law and the actual application of the law. Could refugees appeal their deportation notice and how were they notified of their rights and their options?

Mr. Grossman also pointed out the huge discrepancy between torture cases identified by non-governmental organizations and those identified by the State. He had not studied the methodologies of both sides, but perhaps people were intimidated or afraid to file complaints. It was hard to accept that there were only four complaints of torture in the whole State so perhaps they should examine their reporting mechanisms to ensure that people could easily lodge complaints and were not afraid to come forward.

He then asked about the budget for addressing gender violence and how many people had been convicted and sentenced for sexual violence and under what articles of the penal code were these cases tried?

Mr. Grossman asked the delegation whether anything had been done to implement the Special Rapporteur’s recommendation that a special high level committee be set up to monitor the police because the practice of police investigating complaints against their own should be changed.

FERNANDO MARINO MENENDEZ, the Committee Chairperson serving as Co-Rapporteur for the report, thanked the delegation for working through the night to provide answers to the Committee’s questions. Despite the wealth of information provided, Mr. Menendez had follow-up questions on border incidents and refugees. Was there a public list of people who had been deported back to Colombia?

With regard to indigenous populations and the protected areas, who oversaw and ensured that indigenous justice was in harmony with the constitution with respect to human rights? If someone felt their human rights had been violated, who could they complain to? For those indigenous populations that were in complete isolation, how was their desire to live this way respected?

Mr. Menendez wanted to reiterate that the internal affairs unit of the police should be replaced by an oversight committee beyond police control. Did any statistics exist about deaths in police custody? In terms of prisons, what were the therapeutic competencies of these social rehabilitation centres?

In terms of the rural defence boards, was he correct that they were not sanctioned by the State and he wanted to know whether the Government was keeping an eye on these groups? Why were they set up and how were they run?

Other Committee Experts asked about allegations of torture in places of detention and whether the State should do more to ascertain the situation in prisons in the country because there was a huge discrepancy between what was reported by non-governmental organizations and the State’s own figures. Several Committee members also raised additional questions about what sanctions had been levied against teachers or other adults who assaulted children in schools. It was noted that there should be medical personnel in the schools where children could go for medical care and to report abuses. Were there any plans to outlaw corporal punishment in the home? Committee Experts also wanted to know if unannounced visits were carried out at mental hospitals or other places where people were held for treatment. Also, were there plans to establish more independent forensic investigation units?

Response by Delegation

The delegation said that regarding the direct application of international law, this had been a provision in the constitution for only two years, but already there had been a few cases in which international law had been directly applied in cases.

In terms of the actual application of the 24 hour rule for people held in detention, as soon as this law was published it became effective immediately. There had been cases in which people were freed after their rights were not read to them and police officers had been expelled from the force after not complying with the rule to read people their rights. In terms of the percentage of people detained without a hearing for more than 24 hours, the State was working on a database to identify these numbers. According to data, only 1 per cent of prisoners were in jail between 6 and 12 months without being convicted, and the State had made great strides in getting people released who were being held without convictions. The State was also investing $200 million for improving conditions in prisons. A citizens inspectorate for jails had also been established two months ago which was separate from the Office of the Ombudsman and civil society groups.

A national policy for refugees had been adopted that included numerous measures to guarantee the rights and recognition of refugees. Refugees received booklets outlining their rights when they arrived in Ecuador. A person had 30 days to appeal a deportation decision and they would never be deported until all appeals were exhausted and they maintained their refugee status throughout the appeals process.

The delegation also pointed out that important changes had been made to professionalize the law enforcement ranks, to increase access to justice, to combat gender violence, and to protect children. These changes were in their initial steps, but they were important nonetheless.

Concluding Remarks

CLAUDIO GROSSMAN, the Committee Expert serving as Rapporteur for the report of Ecuador, expressed the thanks of the whole Committee to the delegation of Ecuador on the responses given and he wished them every success in their journey.

ALEXANDRA MONCADA, Assistant Secretary of the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights of Ecuador, thanked the members of the Committee for their interest and support and this was an opportunity for them to work together to achieve their goals and move forward.


For use of the information media; not an official record

CAT10/029E