|
|
For debate in the Standing Committee see Rule 15 of the Rules of Procedure
Pour débat à la Commission permanente – Voir article 15 du Règlement
Doc. 9073
3 May 2001
European Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT): working methods of the Committee
Report
Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights
Rapporteur: Mr Jerzy Jaskiernia, Poland, Socialist Group
Summary
During its six years of activity the CPT has proved itself to be an effective instrument for the prevention of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
The CPT suffers, however, from the confidentiality rule which governs its work and the lack of adequate resources at its disposal.
The Assembly recommends that the Committee of Ministers remedy these weaknesses.
I. Draft recommendation
1. The Assembly deems it necessary to assess the ten years and more that the machinery set up by the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment has been in operation.
2. This non-judicial, preventive machinery is based on unexpected visits by members of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) to all places in which persons deprived of their liberty upon a decision by a public authority. While it has proved effective, it is facing a considerable increase in work with the growth of the organisation during the last ten years from 25 to 43 member states.
3. This situation will be exacerbated still further by the entry into force of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention, which opens it to non-member states of the Council of Europe.
4. The smooth operation of the entire machinery is threatened by this situation, which is causing visits to decline in frequency for want of adequate human and financial resources. Ongoing dialogue with member states is indispensable to the system’s effectiveness.
5. The CPT has sought to adapt by reducing the size of delegations and conducting shorter, more targeted visits, particularly in cases of urgency. It has also set up a working group to look into its working methods, which should make an interim report in July 2001.
6. The CPT also suffers from the confidentiality rule imposed upon it by the Convention. While observance of this rule is necessary for effective co-operation with member states, it is an obstacle to publicity about the CPT’s work and hinders co-operation with NGOs. In addition, the fact that the CPT does not publish information about very serious situations means that it risks being seen as an accomplice of governments.
7. The Assembly strongly urges the CPT to increase its co-operation with NGOs known for their activity in combating torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
8. Although they are made public, its annual reports are not distributed widely enough and thus have no adequate effect on national governments.
9. The Assembly therefore decides to hold periodic debates in future on the work of the CPT and drawing the attention of national delegations to the annual reports.
10. Accordingly, the Assembly recommends that the Committee of Ministers:
i. increase the CPT’s human and budgetary resources so that it may adequately perform the duties required of it;
ii. encourage the CPT to review its working methods, in particular by conducting a greater number of shorter, more targeted visits and reducing the size of delegations;
iii. invite the States Parties to the Convention to allow the CPT more openness and less strict confidentiality in relation to its work.
II. Explanatory memorandum
by Mr Jaskiernia, Rapporteur
A. Introduction
1. A year after the celebration of the tenth anniversary of the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which was marked by a major conference in Strasbourg in 1999, it has to be said that the enthusiasm then current has today given way to a certain fear. The new geography of Europe is now leading the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (The Assembly) to review the effectiveness and credibility of machinery created in a very different context.
2. The convention provides for non-judicial machinery of a preventive character to strengthen the protection of persons deprived of their liberty. The machinery is founded on a system of visits by members of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT), which is made up of independent, impartial experts from various backgrounds (lawyers, specialists in prison and police questions, doctors, etc). The CPT visits many places where persons are deprived of their liberty – prisons, detention centres for minors, police stations, military detention centres, psychiatric hospitals, holding centres for aliens, for example – in order to assess how detainees are treated and, where appropriate, to recommend improvements.
3. The prison population in Ukraine numbers some 200 000 persons and, at over a million, that of the Russian Federation far exceeds the combined ordinary-law prison populations of all the other Council of Europe member states1. Moreover, with the entry into force of Protocol No. 1, the Convention will be open to non-member states. Apart from the purely quantitative aspect of the prison situation in the new member states, there is also a qualitative problem, as the CPT President said as early as 1994. There is a pitfall to be avoided, namely, for want of resources, neglecting the older member states in order to concentrate on the new States Parties to the Convention. In Recommendation 1257 (1995) on the conditions of detention in Council of Europe member states, the Assembly drew attention to overcrowding in many prisons in Europe and deplored a situation that was a cause for concern in most west European prisons2.
4. For some years now the CPT has been voicing alarm at the disastrous consequences stemming from a lack of adequate resources that could well undermine its effectiveness3. In the above-mentioned report to the Assembly, I put forward proposals for increasing the CPT’s human and budgetary resources, promoting greater awareness of the CPT’s activities, and strengthening co-operation between the CPT and other international institutions. This memorandum sets out to evaluate the impact of the proposals made in the recommendation adopted by the Assembly and to put forward a number of ideas, as the budget appropriations granted by the Committee of Ministers are still inadequate.
5. A CPT working party is currently considering certain questions relating to the preparation and conduct of the visits, the procedure for drawing up and adopting visit reports, the functioning of the plenary sessions, the introduction of a system of chambers, enlargement of the CPT Bureau, the structure of the secretariat and budget resources. It is to submit an interim report to the Committee in July 2001.
B. Resources
6. The first question to consider, because it affects all the proposals that will be made in this memorandum, concerns the CPT’s budgetary resources. The CPT itself welcomed the measures, which the Committee of Ministers took in 1996 and 1997 to introduce a retainer system for members of the Bureau and strengthen its secretariat4. In 1999 the Committee of Ministers allocated additional resources following the Action Plan adopted by the Heads of State and Governments of the member States of the Council of Europe at their Second Strasbourg Summit Summit5.
7. Nevertheless, the CPT is aware of the budget constraints it faces. In the eighth general report on its activities, it recalled that it would “strive to be modest in its future budgetary requests and continue to seek ways to enhance the cost-effectiveness of its operating procedures. Nevertheless, in view of the significant geographical expansion of its activities, the CPT will be obliged to request in due course that the resources placed at its disposal be further augmented”6.
1. Operating procedures
8. The CPT’s work is based on the concept of ongoing dialogue with States. However, in the 5th general report on its activities, the Committee expressed dissatisfaction with its own performance in this respect7, because the interval between periodic visits to a country was longer than it would wish. “In this context, the CPT must stress that in the absence of a sustained post-visit ongoing dialogue, the momentum for change generated by a visit will almost certainly be frittered away”8.
9. In a letter of 17 June 1996 the CPT President estimated needs at 200 days of visits per year9, as from 2000, which would enable the Committee to ensure that the average period between periodic visits to a given country did not exceed four years10 so as to maintain the momentum for change and preserve the CPT’s effectiveness11. Since this number of days is far from being achieved (150 days in 1999), and for want of adequate resources, the CPT is at present unable to attain this objective in many cases. In 1999 it managed to respect the four-year interval only in respect of Bulgaria and Portugal. It particularly regrets the intervals of 5 years in the case of Austria and Hungary, 6 years in the case of Norway and Liechtenstein, and 7 years in the case of San Marino12. In this connection the CPT stressed in its 10th general report on its activities that it “very much hopes that it will be in a position to increase the number of visit days to 165 in 2001 and to finally attain the objective of 200 days of visits per year in 2003”.
10. The CPT noted in the 8th general report on its activities that it planned to give more life to the process of ongoing dialogue, in particular by developing the practice of face-to-face discussions between national authorities and representatives of the Committee on matters of special concern. Indeed, there is no substitute for direct contact when it comes to settling issues which are often complex and sometimes very sensitive for the authorities concerned. Moreover, a short stay by a smaller delegation limited to discussions at Governmental level – and thus having very few financial implications – can achieve results that render a visit by the Committee unnecessary13. The CPT intends to pursue the practice of face-to-face discussions between the authorities of the different countries and representatives of the Committee. It even hopes to hold them more frequently, especially when a visit report is being forwarded, so as to focus the authorities’ attention on key issues raised in it and to ensure that information is passed on to all relevant government departments. Discussions of this kind were held in Sofia in December 1999 in connection with the transmission of the report on the CPT’s visit to Bulgaria earlier in the year14. Without a doubt the number of such discussions should be increased.
11. Furthermore, the suggestion was made at the 1999 conference that greater emphasis be placed on short, very targeted visits. The participants emphasised in this connection the need to enhance the Committee’s rapid-reaction capacity15. Such visits are in practice an instrument of rapid reaction and a tool for prompt evaluation of the implementation of the CPT’s recommendations. For example, a four-day visit to Portugal was organised in 1996 (Oporto prison) and a three-day visit to Greece (the public paedo-psychiatric hospital of Attica). Mention may also be made of the very targeted visit to Spain in 1997 to monitor the specific case of a person deprived of liberty. Recently, the CPT paid two visits in a short space of time (February/March 2000 and April 2000) to Chechnya, where it was able to fulfil its mandate under the Convention16. There are, however, other cases where requests have been received and where rapid reactions of this kind might have been desirable.
12. To reinforce the Committee’s rapid-reaction capacity and guarantee a degree of continuity, traditional visits would need to be combined with the ongoing dialogue and/or with short monitoring visits17. An imaginative combination of the different types of visit ought to enable the CPT to continue its work in an effective, credible manner, despite a decline in the frequency of the much more cumbersome periodic visits.18
2. Structural reforms
13. What kind of proposals can be envisaged? As far as operational procedures are concerned, the CPT’s secretariat has been reorganised into three operational units backed up by a central section. However, the CPT observes that redeployment of the additional posts to the secretariat has been delayed. It must be realised that while there are budgetary difficulties, the true problem is principally one of human resources, as the visits cannot be carried out effectively without adequate staff. Providing money is not enough; posts must be filled too.
14. The CPT has examined the possibility of working as chambers, in particular when examining draft visit reports. Although the Convention does not provide for chambers, the CPT can see no legal impediment to the introduction of such a measure via its rules of procedure, provided that its visit reports are always formally adopted by the Committee in plenary session.19 Similarly, it has been suggested that a country or group of countries be assigned to a member or group of members of the CPT who are qualified to examine the situation in the country or countries concerned, with the help of the secretariat or of an expert20.
15. The Committee has reduced the number of its plenary meetings (from 4 to 3) and is still trying to enhance the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of its procedures so as to be able to devote more human and financial resources to its principal function, namely visits. It has, for example, introduced an accelerated procedure for examining visit reports, which are normally adopted without debate, thus enabling it to reduce still further the number of days it meets in plenary sitting during a plenary session in Strasbourg. As a result more time has been freed up for the work of the delegations carrying out the visits. It is interesting to note that the number of visit reports is much higher than it was in 1996 (16 reports adopted in 1999 compared with 7 reports in 1996), despite the smaller number of plenary sessions. The new, accelerated procedure has been a success21 and has made it possible to deal with a growing number of reports without extending the duration of the plenary sessions22. Clearly this trend must continue.
16. Lastly, mention must be made of the length of the reports (80 pages on average), which has an obvious financial impact, particularly if we put ourselves in the position of the different states, which have to translate the English- or French-language version transmitted to them. As quality and quantity do not necessarily go hand in hand, it would be preferable to try and draw up shorter reports: these would also have a greater impact on the public.
3. Budgetary reforms
17. As regards budgetary questions, the CPT has discussed voluntary contributions by member states: should lack of resources compel it to turn to voluntary contributions, these could in no circumstances be targeted in terms of countries to be visited: a state could not, for example, propose an ad hoc visit to another state. On the other hand, voluntary contributions could be acceptable in order to recruit temporary staff in the secretariat or improve the infrastructure and the library. If absolutely necessary, it would be possible to accept a voluntary contribution for visits to a particular geographical region, for example the countries of central and eastern Europe23.
18. At the 1999 event on the prevention of torture at the dawn of the new millennium, a number of participants proposed that the CPT should develop the assistance aspect of its activities. Many states wholeheartedly agree with the Committee’s recommendations but argue quite convincingly that implementing them is beyond their current means. One possibility would be to develop channels through which certain of the CPT’s recommendations with substantial financial implications, in particular those relating to a country’s infrastructure, could be submitted for consideration to other international organisations which may have the necessary funds at their disposal24. Another approach would be to set up, in the framework of the Council of Europe, a special fund to assist states in implementing the CPT’s recommendations. Such a fund might be fed from both governmental and non-governmental sources25.
19. Similarly, the CPT can on occasion encounter situations calling for a humanitarian response (food or medical aid) which it is not itself able to furnish. Although the CPT, by virtue of its powers under the Convention, is in a position to identify needs which might not be readily apparent, it has neither the mandate nor the organisational capacity and resources to distribute aid. Procedures need to be developed whereby, when necessary and having due regard to the principles of co-operation and confidentiality, relevant organisations can be alerted to such situations without delay26.
20. The ongoing dialogue between the CPT and the state visited is unfortunately not all it could be. Yet it is this dialogue which makes the visit part of a continuous process and provides opportunities for assessing the implementation of recommendations. It is a phase whose significance and importance are going to increase in a context of 41 states visited every four years and which ought to be improved and strengthened. It is important that the new challenges should not mask existing problems and that the CPT’s ambitions should not be revised downwards27.
C. Promoting awareness
21. A common remark in the reports is that action at the national and local level to raise the awareness of the staffs concerned is unsatisfactory28. The requisite knowledge is rarely found below the governmental level or, apart from in the main prisons, below the management and senior officials. At the 1999 conference, emphasis was again placed on the need for the CPT’s visit reports to be better known in the states concerned, because in many countries even the institutions visited by the CPT do not always have access to the information29. Another suggestion was translation of the CPT’s reports into the languages of the states visited30. This would also do much to enhance the quality of the ongoing dialogue between the CPT and the national authorities.
22. The Committee of Ministers and the Assembly call on the authorities of the member states to inform the relevant national or local authorities of the existence, powers and role of the CPT31. Apart from transmitting information, what currently needs to be done is to provide training. It is now accepted that “all prevention of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment begins with instruction in human rights to be given in all systems and at all levels of education and as part of training for all civil and military staff, whatever their rank or field”32. As early as 1997 the CPT contemplated reinforcing the interface between the CPT’s activities and the existing assistance programmes for the development and consolidation of democratic stability in Europe (ADACS) in certain fields, such as training for law-enforcement officers, prison officers and health personnel in prisons and psychiatric establishments. States should therefore make provision for training for all personnel responsible for persons deprived of their liberty (practical training in the treatment of persons in their charge integrated into specific training for each separate field of activity). Moreover, states should see to it that officials responsible for replying to the CPT’s reports are trained so that they can focus on the main points and forward to the Committee the kind of information it is looking for.
23. The proposal to hold seminars, made in 1997, was welcomed by both the CPT33 and the Committee of Ministers34. Since then, the Committee has organised, and with notable success, a number of seminars in member countries. In 1999 the CPT acknowledged that the degree of co-operation with its delegations was highly satisfactory at both the national and the local levels. This encouraging situation is clearly due, in part, to the new practice of holding seminars in the states which have recently become Parties to the Convention, for example those in Riga and Saint Petersburg. In addition, CPT members have taken part in meetings organised by intergovernmental and non-governmental organisations to explain particular aspects of the Committee’s work35.
24. In this context, R. Bank has put forward the idea of setting up an international committee to prepare a draft education and training programme. The preventive impact of education programmes, which has been underlined by the CPT and the UN’s special rapporteur, could in fact be enhanced by the inclusion of independent professionals in the ranks of those responsible for organising and monitoring these training programmes. This approach should be applied to various aspects of deprivation of liberty. NGOs and outside experts could play an important part in this specific field and cover all European countries36.
D. Co-operation with international organisations
1. The principle of confidentiality
25. In my 1997 report I pointed out that relations between the CPT and the member states must respect the two principles of co-operation and confidentiality. It is not the CPT’s role to condemn states but rather to help them prevent ill-treatment of persons deprived of their liberty37. At a meeting of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, it was explained that for the CPT, without the permission of the state concerned, to publish a visit report or divulge information it had gathered would be a flagrant violation of the Convention and might result in a state’s refusing to co-operate with it in the future. The CPT works in a climate of trust, and this makes for very frank dialogue on sometimes disturbing questions.
26. However, while this principle exists, it is subject to certain limitations, if not exceptions. Article 10(2)38, often presented as an exception, is more a limitation to the principle. If a Party does not co-operate or refuses to improve the situation in the light of the CPT’s recommendations and gives reasons, the CPT may decide, by a two-thirds majority of its members, to make a public statement on the matter. It has done so twice concerning Turkey, in 1992 and 199639.
27. In my 1997 report I noted that most states choose to waive the rule of confidentiality and publish the reports, in many cases together with their response40. In fact, the general reports on the CPT’s activities show that most of the visit reports are published and that those which have not been are those only recently transmitted to the governments: in all likelihood they will be published in the near future41.
28. The CPT was once considered too discreet in discussions on the results of its work. This situation has changed too, because for a number of years now members of the CPT and its secretariat have been taking part in seminars and debates42.
29. There is thus a trend towards greater transparency. And this observation stems from an awareness first voiced at a seminar held in Strasbourg in 1988, when L. Joinet declared, “co-operation yes, compromise no”43. Moreover, at a recent meeting of our Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, the point was made that if it did not divulge the information it gathered, the CPT might become an accomplice and cover abuses. Nowadays some people regard the idea of confidentiality as outmoded and have asked the CPT to change its practice in this regard and show some flexibility in interpreting the principle44.
2. Co-operation with non-governmental organisations
30. The question then arises as to the relationship between the CPT and non-governmental organisations. The confidentiality rule means that, even if it had the resources to do so, the CPT could not feed back to NGOs information which they themselves had supplied45. Moreover, with the expansion of its geographical scope, the CPT has had to set priorities with regard to direct links with NGOs and other outside partners, concentrating on those considered vital or necessary. However, a decline in real terms in resources and finance leading to a growing exclusion of NGOs will in turn weaken the CPT’s effectiveness. Restricting the lines of communication with NGOs would reduce both the quantity and the quality of the information available to the CPT to supplement that supplied by the authorities and give a more balanced view. Furthermore, the broadening of the CPT’s mission would be delayed. Its effectiveness could be undermined if the level of co-operation is downgraded46.
31. At the “Prevention of Torture at the Dawn of a New Millennium” seminar in Strasbourg in 1999, the participants stressed the need for greater synergy between the CPT and non-governmental organisations operating at local level. They took the view that this would be beneficial as regards the process of monitoring the states’ implementation of the CPT’s recommendations47.
32. Ideally NGOs ought indeed to play a dual role of information provider and monitoring agency. The “big” organisations (Amnesty International, Association for the Prevention of Torture, Helsinki Watch) have an important part to play in supplying information to the CPT. For their part, national NGOs provide a crucial bridge between the CPT’s dialogue with the state party on the one hand and the domestic debate relating to policy development on the other48. In this connection, it has been proposed that a network of critical NGOs should be set up and supported throughout Europe in order significantly to increase the Committee’s effectiveness and provide a central contact point (eg the Association for the Prevention of Torture) for a permanent link between the CPT and its partners: this would also act as a filter for the information forwarded by NGOs in order to reduce the Committee’s workload and widen the sources of information, as there is an unquestionable shortage of resources49.
33. This is why it is perhaps useful to take a fresh look at the proposals which a representative of a British NGO made at a conference in Strasbourg in 1988. These were that:
a) the secretariat should ask each of the NGOs with which it is in contact to provide an annual update of information on conditions of detention. Not only would it be advantageous to have such information but also an annual process of this kind would put relations between NGOs and the CPT on a regular and more structured footing;
b) the experts who assist the CPT and accompany its members on visits to the Parties ought to be encouraged to contact NGOs in the countries they are to visit50
34. Obviously, developments in the principle concerning publication of visit reports cease to be a brake on exchanges between NGOs and the Committee once NGOs, like the CPT members themselves, respect the confidentiality of certain information. We take the view that the distinction to be drawn between the various types of information that might be subject to the confidentiality rule means that there could be a freer flow of information to NGOs about activities relating to the CPT’s visits and the organisation of them.
3. Co-operation with intergovernmental organisations
35. It is also important for the CPT to have closer contacts with other intergovernmental international organisations. With regard to sources of information on conditions of detention, I recommended in 1997 that the CPT should take advantage of the information already available on the subject in the Council of Europe, and some Assembly committees, such as the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights and the Monitoring Committee51. The CPT appreciates, moreover, the measures taken to promote co-operation between it and the Assembly and to ensure that relevant information gathered by the Assembly is transmitted to it52.
36. The CPT nonetheless hopes that there will be more effective synergy between it and the Assembly, whose members, unlike the CPT, can bring pressure to bear on states and, for example, ask why they refuse to publish a report. In this context it is a pity that when two public statements were made concerning Turkey, no member asked that the matter be debated in the Assembly so as to draw attention to a member state’s failure to honour its obligations (and the human rights violations in question were “serious”).
37. This being so, as soon as the governments receive the CPT’s reports, the Assembly and the Committee of Ministers should bring pressure to bear to facilitate their publication. The Assembly ought also to monitor known sensitive situations in certain places of detention and keep an eye on the action which states take on the CPT’s recommendations. It has been suggested that the Assembly should hold a regular debate on the CPT’s work, possibly based on its annual reports. This would enhance the public impact of the Committee’s work. For example, the CPT was very surprised by the extraordinary effect of the recent revelations by Mrs Véronique Vasseur, Chief Medical Officer of the Santé Prison in Paris, about the state of prisons in France, when the CPT had condemned conditions of detention in that same prison as early as 1998.
38. In my report I also mentioned co-operation with other bodies such as the UN Committee against Torture53. At a recent meeting of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Assembly, confirmation was given that the two committees (CPT and CAT) exchange information insofar as their respective rules of confidentiality allow and that they try to avoid duplication. In 1999, an international tribunal attached to the UN, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), asked the CPT to monitor, in certain states, the treatment of persons serving sentences imposed by the Tribunal. The CPT decided to accede to this request54.
E. Conclusion
39. In conclusion, a number of proposals may be made, such as to:
a. increase the CPT’s human and budgetary resources;
b. step up the number of short, targeted visits by the CPT, face-to-face discussions and the ongoing dialogue with the member states;
c. enrich the information provided on the CPT’s activities and promote greater awareness of them;
d. develop co-operation between the CPT and non-governmental and intergovernmental international organisations;
e. hold a regular Assembly debate on the CPT’s work.
Reporting committee: Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights
Reference to committee: Order No. 530 ( 1997)
Draft recommendation adopted unanimously by the committee on 6 April 2001
Members of the committee: Mr Jansson (Chairperson), Mr Magnusson, Mr Frunda, Mrs Gülek (Vice-Chairpersons), Mr Akçali, Mr G. Aliyev, Mr Andreoli, Mrs van Ardenne-van der Hoeven, Mr Attard Montalto (alternate: Mr Asciak), Mr Bartumeu Cassany, Mr Bindig, Mr Bordas, Mr Bruce, Mr Bulavinov, Mr Cilevics, Mr Clerfayt, Mr Contestabile, Mr Demetriou, Mr Dimas, Mr Enright, Mrs Err, Mr Floros, Mrs Frimansdóttir, Mr Fyodorov, Mr Guardans, Mr Gustafsson, Mrs Hadjiyeva, Mr Holovaty, Mr Irtemçelik, Mr Jakic, Mr Jaskiernia, Mr Jurgens, Mr Kelemen, Lord Kirkhill, Mr Kostytsky, Mr S. Kovalev, Mr Kresák (alternate: Mr Tkác), Mr Kroupa, Mrs Krzyzanowska, Mr Lacão, Mr Lento, Mr Lintner, Mr Lippelt, Mr Loutfi, Mrs Markovic-Dimova, Mr Marty, Mr McNamara, Mr Michel (alternate: Mr Hunault), Mr Moeller, Mrs Nabholz-Haidegger, Mr Olteanu, Mr Pavlov, Mr Pollo, Mrs Pourtaud, Mr Rodeghiero, Mrs Roudy, Mrs Serafini (alternate: Mr Provera), Mr Simonsen, Mr Shaklein, Mr Skrabalo, Mr Solé Tura, Mr Spindelegger, Mr Stankevic, Mr Stoica, Mrs Süssmuth, Mr Svoboda, Mr Symonenko (alternate: Mr Khunov), Mr Tabajdi, Mr Tallo, Mrs Tevdoradze, Mr Uriarte, Mr Vanoost, Mr Vera Jardim, Mr Wilkinson, Mrs Wohlwend, Mr Wojcik, Mrs Wurm (alternate: Mrs Stoisits)
N.B. The names of those members who were present at the meeting are printed in italics.
Secretaries to the committee: Mr Plate, Ms Coin, Ms Kleinsorge, Mr Cupina
1 See Doc. 7784, Report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights of 26 March 1997 on strengthening the machinery of the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture, § 51, for which I was rapporteur.
2 Recommendation 1257 (1995) of the Assembly on the conditions of detention in Council of Europe member states, § 3.
3 8th (1997), 9th (1998), and 10th (1999) General reports on the CPT’s activities.
4 Doc. 7784, previously mentioned, § 6 of the draft recommendation.
5 Doc. 8306 of 26 January 1999, reply by the Committee of Ministers to Parliamentary Assembly Recommendation 1323, paragraph viii.
6 8th General report on the CPT’s activities, covering the period from 1 January to 31 December 1997, CPT/Inf (98) 12, § 21.
8 CPT/Inf (95) 10, § 10.
9 9th General report on the CPT’s activities, covering the period from 1 January to 31 December 1998, CPT/Inf (99) 12, § 18.
10 8th General report (1997), § 19. A periodic visit to a country lasts from 8 to 16 days.
12 10th General report on the CPT’s activities (1999), CPT/Inf (2000) 13, § 4 and § 20.
13 8th General report on the CPT’s activities (1997), CPT/Inf (98) 12, § 7.
14 10th General report on the CPT’s activities (1999), CPT/Inf (2000) 13, § 9.
15 10th General report on the CPT’s activities (1999), § 2.
16 See CPT press releases of 6 March, 4 April (publication of the comments of the CPT delegation) and 2 May 2000.
18 B. Bernath and A. Khakee, "L’avenir du CPT- aspects institutionnels", Association for the Prevention of Torture, 20 ans consacrés à la réalisation d’une idée, Recueil d’articles en l’honneur de J.J. Gautier, Genève, 1997, p. 103.
19 9th General report on the CPT’s activities (1998), CPT/Inf (99) 12, § 8.
20 R.Morgan, M.Evans, Preventing Torture, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1998, p 367.
21 8th General report on the CPT’s activities (1997), CPT/Inf (98) 12, § 6.
22 10th General report on the CPT’s activities (1999), § 7.
23 C. Nicolay, “5 ans d’activité du CPT: et maintenant ?”, Actes du séminaire du 5 au 7 décembre 1994 à Strasbourg, La mise en œuvre de la CEPT. Bilan et perspectives après 5 ans d’activités du CPT, Geneva, 1995, p 56.
24 8th General report on the CPT’s activities (1997), § 23.
25 10th General report on the CPT’s activities, covering the period 1 January to 31 December 1999, § 2; R. Morgan, M. Evans, Preventing Torture, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1998, p 370.
26 8th General report on the CPT’s activities covering the period 1 January to 31 December 1997, § 24.
27 B. Bernath and A. Khakee, “L’avenir du CPT- aspects institutionnels”, Association pour la Prévention de la Torture, 20 ans consacrés à la réalisation d’une idée, Recueil d’articles en l’honneur de J.J. Gautier, Geneva, 1997, p 103.
29 10th General report on the CPT’s activities covering the period 1 January to 31 December 1999, § 2.
30 10th General report on the CPT’s activities (1999), § 2.
31 Doc. 8306 of 26 January 1999, Committee of Ministers reply to Assembly Recommendation 1323, paragraph ix.
32 Recommendation 971 (1983) of the Parliamentary Assembly, 33rd Ordinary Session, § 8.
34 Doc. 8306 of 26 January 1999, Committee of Ministers reply to Assembly Recommendation 1323, paragraph ix.
35 10th General report on the CPT’s activities (1999), § 8.
36 R. Bank, “Preventive measures against torture: an analysis of standards set by the CPT, CAT HCR and special rapporteur”, Association pour la prévention de la torture, 20 ans consacrés à la réalisation d’une idée, Recueil d’articles en l’honneur de J.J. Gautier, Genève 1997, p. 143.
38 “If the Party fails to co-operate or refuses to improve the situation in the light of the Committee’s recommendations, the Committee may decide, after the Party has had an opportunity to make known its views, by a majority of two-thirds of its members to make a public statement on the matter.”
41 8th General report on the CPT’s activities (1997), CPT/Inf (98) 12; 9th General report on the CPT’s activities (1998), CPT/Inf (99) 12, § 10; 10th General report on the CPT’s activities, CPT/Inf (2000) 13, § 11.
42 R. Morgan, M.Evans, Preventing Torture, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1998, p 376.
43 Strasbourg Seminar, 7-8 November 1988, The implementation of the ECPT, Human Rights Law Journal, vol. 10 n°1-2 p 181.
44 R. Morgan, M. Evans, ibid.
45 R. Morgan, M. Evans, A European committee for the prevention of torture in The challenges of a greater Europe, the Council of Europe and democratic security, Editions de la Nuée-Bleue, Council of Europe, 1996, pp 91-92.
46 R. Morgan, M. Evans, Preventing Torture, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1998, p 378.
47 10th General report on the CPT’s activities (1999), § 2.
48 R. Morgan, M. Evans, A European committee for the prevention of torture in The challenges of a greater Europe, the Council of Europe and democratic security, Editions de la Nuée-Bleue, Council of Europe, 1996, pp 85-92.
49 S. Casale, « Conclusions et suggestions du séminaire », Actes du séminaire du 5 au 7 décembre 1994 à Strasbourg, La mise en œuvre de la CEPT. Bilan et perspectives après 5 ans d’activités du CPT, Geneva, 1995, pp. 137-143.
50 S Shaw « Le rôle des ONG dans l’assistance et la promotion du travail du CPT », Actes du séminaire du 5 au 7 décembre 1994 à Strasbourg, La mise en œuvre de la Convention européenne pour la prévention de la torture. Bilan et perspectives après 5 ans d’activités du CPT, Genève 1995, p. 67.
52 Assembly Recommendation 1323 and Order No. 530 (1997), 8th General report on the CPT’s activities (1997), CPT/Inf (98) 12, § 13.
54 10th General report on the CPT’s activities (1999), CPT/Inf (2000) 13.