For debate in the Standing Committee see Rule 15 of the Rules of Procedure

Pour débat ŕ la Commission permanente – Voir article 15 du Rčglement

Doc. 9074

3 May 2001

European Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT): composition of the Committee


Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights

Rapporteur: Lord Kirkhill, United Kingdom, Socialist Group


The Assembly reminds national delegations of the criteria to be met when drawing up the lists of candidates for the CPT, namely to ensure a more balanced composition as regards professional background, gender, age and availability. It instructs its Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights to make sure that this is indeed the case.

I.        Draft resolution

1.       The Assembly recalls its Recommendation 1323 (1997), in which it stressed the need for a more balanced composition of the CPT, with regard to professional background, gender and age, and urged that emphasis be placed on the criterion of members’ availability.

2.       It also stressed the need for rapid entry into force of Protocol No. 2 to the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture, which provides for the orderly renewal of CPT members and the possibility for them to be re-elected twice.

3.       It regrets that its recommendations have not been acted upon and that for want of a single ratification – that of Ukraine - neither Protocol No. 1, which opens the convention to non-member States, nor Protocol No 2 has yet entered into force.

4.       The current composition of the CPT is not balanced either from the point of view of the representation of women or from that of the different professional backgrounds required of its members.

5.       The Assembly acknowledges that it is partly responsible in that national delegations propose candidates to the Parliamentary Assembly and the Assembly Bureau is charged with forwarding candidacies to the Committee of Ministers, which gives it the opportunity of exercising a certain amount of control.

6.       In practice, however, the Bureau is unable to examine candidatures itself in order to ensure their conformity with the criteria set by the Assembly. It ought to delegate this task to its Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights.

7.       Accordingly, the Assembly:

i. earnestly requests national delegations to the Assembly to verify that the lists of CPT candidates which they supply are in conformity with the requirements of Recommendation 1323 (1997);

ii. instructs its Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights to examine lists of candidates supplied by national delegations in order to ensure that they meet the criteria established in Recommendation 1323 (1997) and, where this is not the case, to recommend that the Bureau request a fresh list;

iii. instructs the same committee to draw up a recommendation to the Assembly Bureau listing candidates in order of preference.

II.       Explanatory memorandum

      by Lord Kirkhill, Rapporteur

A.        Introduction

1.        In 1997, as part of their study on the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture (ECPT), the Assembly and the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights looked into the composition of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT). At present, the CPT’s effectiveness and credibility are in danger of being undermined by the expansion of its activities. This situation creates a need to pinpoint areas for reflection and make proposals for change, particularly in relation to the committee’s membership.

2.        In Recommendation 1323 (1997), the Assembly said that “the effectiveness of the committee’s work also depends on the quality and continuity of its members”, and it stressed the need for:

i.       a more balanced composition of the CPT with regard to professional background, gender and age;

ii.       the rapid entry into force of Protocol No. 2 to the convention, which provides for regular replacement of the committee’s members while allowing them to be re-elected twice1.

These two points have not so far been applied satisfactorily and should therefore be looked into again.

3.        Not all the problems concerning the composition of the committee are so complex as to be unsolvable, and states parties have been surprisingly slow in summoning up the political will to tackle them2. Here I obviously have in mind Protocol No. 2, which, seven years after being opened for signature, is still not in force, even though it is a technical rather than a political document and does not increase the budgetary burden on member states. Thankfully, this situation is changing. It looks highly probable that soon all the ratifications necessary for the protocol to enter into force will finally have been completed (cf. paragraph 6 below).

B.       The disadvantages of the current procedure for appointing CPT members

4.        The structural problems relating to CPT composition and membership replacement are not new. As early as 1994, the Chair of the CPT, Mr. C. Nicolay, was proclaiming the urgency of bringing Protocol No. 2 into force. At present, the expiry dates of the terms of office of CPT members vary considerably: every five or six months an election has to be held to fill a seat. This plethora of expiry dates creates considerable problems, particularly regarding the organisation of visits and the composition of delegations3.

C.       Protocol No 2

1.       The content of the protocol

5.        The protocol provides for committee members to be placed in one of two groups for election purposes, the aim being to ensure that half the membership is replaced every two years. To this end, the Committee of Ministers is allowed to set longer (up to six years) or shorter (not less than two years) terms of office for some members. This is intended to provide stability. Similarly, members could be re-elected twice, in order to maintain a balance between new members and longer-standing ones who had experience of the committee’s work. This makes it much easier to ensure coherence in the committee’s work.

2.       Ratifications

6.        Recently, the Committee of Ministers unreservedly associated itself with the appeal issued by the Parliamentary Assembly to member states that had not yet ratified the two protocols to the convention to do so as soon as possible4. As stated above (cf. paragraph 3), the Parliamentary Assembly’s appeal seems finally to have been heeded. For example, when Georgia recently acceded to the ECPT, it ratified Protocols Nos. 1 and 2 at the same time. In July 2000, Andorra did the same. At the Rome conference celebrating the 50th anniversary of the European Convention on Human Rights, Croatia deposited instruments ratifying Protocol No. 2 to the ECPT. Ukraine, the only state whose ratification is still pending, intends to ratify the protocol soon. We therefore have every reason to believe that Protocol No. 2, which is fundamental to continuity of CPT membership, will be in force by 2001.

D.       Requirements for optimum CPT composition

7.        In Recommendation 1323 (1997), the Assembly requested that the Committee of Ministers “pay particular attention, when electing members of the CPT, to the criteria of professional background, gender and age, in order to ensure a more balanced composition of the committee and, in particular, a greater participation of prison specialists and forensic scientists, as well as an increased number of women among its members; the criterion of availability should also be emphasised in order to ensure the committee’s effectiveness”.

8.        These criteria were accepted by the committee itself. “The CPT fully agrees with those criteria and would add, as regards professional background, that it would be very helpful if the committee’s membership were also to include some persons with specialist practical knowledge of police work.” In this connection, it is worth highlighting the United Kingdom’s offer to pay for a police officer to be seconded to the secretariat for one year in order to assist members and make the committee’s work in police contexts more effective.

E.       The present membership of the CPT(*)

9.        The membership in 1997 was arguably the most balanced and specialist that the CPT has ever had. The number of members with a medical background was on a par with the number of lawyers. Further, the CPT’s desire for more members with specialist practical knowledge of penitentiary systems and more members from forensic medicine was gradually being met6. By 1999, however, the number of members with a medical background were outnumbered by lawyers, and there were few members with specialist knowledge of the police. Only the number of members with practical experience of penitentiary systems was reached7. Regrettably, the results of the year 2000 were not entirely satisfactory either.

10.        Having said this, I would, however, not entirely exclude some "generalists" from the Committee, provided they comply with the criteria explained above. Without any doubt a person with both a diversity of experience and commitment would enrich the CPT.

11.        In Order No. 530 (1997), the Assembly recommended particular emphasis on professional background, gender and age. As regards the gender mix, the latest count was nine women out of 36 CPT members, fewer than the previous year. Yet women members are necessary when centres are visited where there are women. Female members would also make an essential contribution in the form of “experience, psychological sensitivity and fair-mindedness”8. Since selection is carried out in the first instance by national delegations, the Assembly could point out the importance of female candidatures for these posts.

12.        As regards age limit, the paramount concern is effectiveness9. Although the problems in the new member states of central and eastern Europe are not, in essence, different from those encountered elsewhere in Europe, the economic and political situation, together with the climate of opinion, may well make for taxing work conditions10. Even if the most active members are not necessarily the youngest, the fact remains that the prevailing conditions require members to be in good physical and mental shape11.

13.        At the seminar in Strasbourg in 1988, multidisciplinary capability and experience, presupposing pluralism in the CPT’s membership12, were extensively referred to. If we look at the list of places visited, the variety of institutions is evident: prisons, police stations, psychiatric institutions, military detention facilities, holding centres for foreign nationals, and places where minors can be detained by judicial or administrative order13. Some participants at the 1999 conference also regretted what they saw as neglect of certain institutions such as military detention facilities and “homes” for the aged14.

14.        The reader will need no reminding that the text of the convention itself states: “The members of the committee shall be chosen from among persons … known for their competence in the field of human rights or having professional experience in the areas covered by this convention” (Article 4.2). The convention is binding on member states, which must therefore propose candidatures from practitioners who have knowledge of the different places of detention mentioned in the previous paragraph.

15.        Also important (see Assembly Recommendation 1323 (1997)) is knowledge of other bodies concerned with torture, such as the United Nations Committee against Torture or national institutions. Recruiting members with knowledge of such bodies would help give direct national and international publicity to the CPT’s activities, with indirect publicity being provided by organisation of seminars.

F.       Remedies

1.       The current procedure

16.        National parliamentary delegations submit a list of three candidates to the Assembly Bureau, at least two of whom must be nationals. The Bureau considers the candidates and draws up a list for the Committee of Ministers, which elects one member from it.

17.        It must be pointed out that a prior, informal exchange of views on the lists at this stage of the procedure so that the CPT’s needs are actually taken into account would be highly constructive. More particularly, the national delegations responsible for the initial proposals should take greater care to ascertain the committee’s needs. This would be a great help in achieving a balance of qualifications within the CPT and would also save time - for example, it would avoid rejection of the list by the Assembly Bureau or even the Committee of Ministers.

18.        Similarly, it may be that, despite all efforts, a list of candidates submitted by a national delegation is unsuitable or of questionable suitability. It is then important for the Assembly Bureau to consult the CPT Bureau and, if necessary, shoulder its responsibilities and have no hesitation in sending the list back with the necessary explanations so that the national delegation can adjust its list without too much delay.

2.       Assembly proposals

19.        At the meeting of the Sub-Committee on Human Rights in Strasbourg on 28 September 2000, a proposal was made to establish a procedure for selecting candidates by interview, modelled on the procedure laid down for judges in the European Court of Human Rights.

20.        In my report on election of judges to the European Court of Human Rights15, I mentioned the success of the procedure for selecting by interview. The interviews have been very useful in forming a better idea of candidates’ qualities so as to make an informed choice, and have brought about a degree of democratic transparency. The Assembly has decided to continue using this procedure for electing judges16.

G.       Availability of CPT members

21.        Finally, I would like to turn to the question of the availability and independence of CPT members. With regard to availability, until 1994 the CPT was able to function thanks to the great availability of most of its members, who, in the case of the Bureau, devote an average of two or three months a year to CPT work in addition to their ordinary work. However now that the CPT is more widely known its members are often asked to take part in seminars, colloquies, meetings with professionals17 and so on. For that reason, some people have put forward the idea of making the CPT a permanent or near permanent institution. With the admission of new member states, taking the number of parties to 41, the criterion of availability, stipulated in Article 4.4 of the ECPT, will have to be given great attention18. This is a concern the Assembly has regularly voiced19.

22.        As regards independence, in Order No 530 (1997) the Assembly invited its Bureau to ask all candidates who were Parliamentary Assembly members to undertake formally to resign from the Assembly if elected to the CPT 20. It should be kept in mind that independence and impartiality imply that there is no conflict with other activities21. The Assembly therefore expects the elected candidates to respect this essential requirement.

23.        Experience has been, however, that in initial submission of candidatures availability and independence are not always given the required attention. It is therefore important to make national delegations in particular aware of these two crucial requirements for a properly functioning CPT. Availability and, most importantly of all, independence should be the major criteria for selecting candidates.

H.       Conclusions

24.        The information gathered for this paper highlights various issues and underlines the need:

-       to monitor closely the entry into force of Protocol No 2 in the light of recent developments;

-        to achieve a balance in the composition of the committee, which needs more forensic pathologists and persons with experience relating to the police, and to give preference to applications from women with equal qualifications;

- to ensure that members are genuinely available and independent.


Members of the CPT

(as at 15 January 2001)*





Term of office expires

Ms Silvia CASALE, President





            1st Vice-President



Mr Volodymyr YEVINTOV,

            2nd Vice-President



















San Marinese





Mrs Christina DOCTARE






Mr Zdenĕk HÁJEK



Mrs Emilia DRUMEVA



Mr Pieter Reinhard STOFFELEN






Mrs Renate KICKER



Mr Pierre SCHMIT





















Mrs Veronica PIMENOFF



Ms Maria Teresa BELEZA



Mr Fatmir BRAKA




citizen of "the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia"





Mr Marc NČVE



Mr Eugenijus GEFENAS















Mr Mauro PALMA



Mrs Anhelita KAMENSKA




*              At this date, the seats in respect of Georgia, Hungary, Liechtenstein and Spain were vacant.


Abridged Curricula Vitae of Members of the CPT

Mr Antoni ALEIX CAMP (1949), Andorran


ˇ                    Lawyer

ˇ                    Former Director of Police of the Principality of Andorra

ˇ                    Former Director of Andorra Prison



Mrs Ioanna BABASSIKA (1949), Greek


ˇ                    Lawyer

ˇ                    Legal counsellor of the Medical Rehabilitation Center for Torture Victims, Athens



Ms Maria Teresa BELEZA (1951), Portuguese


ˇ                    Lawyer

ˇ                    Associate Professor at the New University of Lisbon

ˇ                    Member of the Higher Council of the Judiciary



Mr Mario BENEDETTINI (1954), San Marinese


ˇ                    Psychotherapist

ˇ                   Co-ordinator of the Drug Dependency Unit in the Neuro-psychiatric Service of San Marino

ˇ                   Founder member of the Fédération européenne des Associations d'Intervenants en Toxicomanie



Mr Fatmir BRAKA (1954), Albanian


ˇ                    Lawyer

ˇ                    Professor of Criminal Law at Tirana University

ˇ                    Former investigating judge



Mr Aleš BUTALA (1952), Slovenian


ˇ                    Lawyer

ˇ                    Former judge

ˇ                    Deputy Ombudsman in the Human Rights Ombudsman Bureau



Ms Silvia CASALE (1945), British


ˇ                    Criminologist

ˇ                    Consultant to the HM Prison Service and HM Prisons Inspectorate

ˇ                    Sentence Review Commissioner, Northern Ireland



Mrs Christina DOCTARE (1943), Swedish


ˇ                    Medical doctor

ˇ                   Former Head of the WHO project on rehabilitation of war victims in former Yugoslavia



Mrs Emilia DRUMEVA (1947), Bulgarian


ˇ                    Head of the Legal Department at the National Assembly

ˇ                    Professor of Constitutional Law at the Plovdiv State University "Paisyi of Hilandar"



Mr Mario FELICE (1958), Maltese


ˇ                    Lawyer

ˇ                    Chairman of the Prison Board of Visitors



Mr Eugenijus GEFENAS (1959), Lithuanian


ˇ                    Medical doctor

ˇ                    Associate Professor at the Medical Faculty of Vilnius University



Mr Zdenĕk HÁJEK (1950), Czech


ˇ                    Lawyer

ˇ                    Former Advisor of the Czech Minister of Justice on prison affairs



Mr Pétur HAUKSSON (1950), Icelander


ˇ                    Psychiatrist

ˇ                    Head of the psychiatric department at Reykjalundur Rehabilitation Center



Mrs Anhelita KAMENŠKA (1965), Latvian


ˇ                    Deputy Director of the Latvian Centre for Human Rights and Ethnic Studies

ˇ                   Programme Director, Prison and Police Reform Programme, Soros Foundation-Latvia



Mrs Renate KICKER (1949), Austrian


ˇ                    Lawyer

ˇ                   Professor at the Institute for International Law and International Relations at the University of Graz



Mr Aurel KISTRUGA (1956), Moldovan


ˇ                    Lawyer

ˇ                    Assistant Judge at the Constitutional Court



Mr Yuri KUDRIAVTSEV (1952), Russian


ˇ                    Lawyer

ˇ                    Head of the Secretariat at the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation



Mr Adam ŁAPTAŚ (1953), Polish


ˇ                    Lawyer

ˇ                   Deputy Principal, Prison for detention in custody pending inquiry in Myslowice (for men)



Mr Andres LEHTMETS (1964), Estonian


ˇ                    Psychiatrist

ˇ                    President of the Estonian Medical Association



Mrs Ingrid LYCKE ELLINGSEN (1933), Norwegian


ˇ                    Psychiatrist

ˇ                    Former Chief Medical Officer and Chief Psychiatrist of the County of Buskerud



Mr Nikola MATOVSKI (1939), citizen of "the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia"


ˇ                    Lawyer

ˇ                    Full Professor at the Faculty of Law, University of St Cyril and Methodius, Skopje



Mr Petros MICHAELIDES (1939), Cypriot


ˇ                    Lawyer

ˇ                    Former Minister of Justice



Mr Marc NČVE (1953), Belgian


ˇ                    Lawyer

ˇ                    Chair of the Prisons Committee of the League of Human Rights



Mr John B. OLDEN (1932), Irish


ˇ                    Former Senior Civil Servant

ˇ                   From 1973 to 1985, Assistant Secretary in the Department of Justice, with responsibility for prisons and the probation service

ˇ                   Former member of the European Committee on Crime Problems, the UN Committee on Crime Prevention and Control and the International Penal and Penitentiary Foundation



Mr Mauro PALMA (1948), Italian


ˇ                    Mathematician

ˇ                   Founder and Honorary President of the Antigone Association (which promotes rights and guarantees in the criminal system)

ˇ                   Adviser to the Minister of Justice, tasked with the  reform of the training system in prisons



Mrs Gisela PERREN-KLINGLER (1944), Swiss


ˇ                    Psychiatrist

ˇ                    Former medical delegate of the ICRC

ˇ                   Member of the Editorial Board of the Journal of the International Society for traumatic stress studies



Mrs Veronica PIMENOFF (1949), Finnish


ˇ                    Psychiatrist

ˇ                   Chief Physician at the Department of Consultation and Liaison Psychiatry, Central Hospital of North Karelia

ˇ                   Vice-member of the Administrative Court of North Karelia, for expert opinion in matters of mental health



Mrs Jagoda POLONCOVÁ (1942), Slovakian


ˇ                    Lawyer

ˇ                    Counsellor at the Ministry of Justice

ˇ                   Member of the Slovak Government Commissions for womens rights and minorities issues



Mr Ole Vedel RASMUSSEN (1946), Danish


ˇ                    Medical doctor

ˇ                   Medical Consultant, International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims (IRCT), Copenhagen, Denmark



Mr Safa REISOĞLU (1929), Turkish


ˇ                    Professor of Law at Marmara University, Istanbul

ˇ                    Former Minister of Education

ˇ                    Former Member of the Turkish Senate

ˇ                    Former Member of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly



Mr Pierre SCHMIT (1951), Luxemburger


ˇ                    Public Prosecutor at the Supreme Court

ˇ                   Former Representative of the Principal State Prosecutor's Office at the Directorate General of Prisons



Mr Rudolf SCHMUCK (1932), German


ˇ                   From 1964 to 1994, holder of various posts in Germany in the field of prison administration, including:



Mr Florin Alexandru STĂNESCU (1933), Romanian


ˇ                    Chief Forensic Pathologist at the Mina Minovici Institute of Forensic Medicine

ˇ                    Professor of Forensic Medicine, Faculty of Stomatology, at the Titu Maiorescu University



Mr Pieter Reinhard STOFFELEN (1939), Dutch


ˇ                    Lawyer

ˇ                    Member of the First Chamber of the Dutch States General

ˇ                    Chairman of the Complaint Committee of the Police force in the Flevoland region



Mr Davor STRINOVIĆ (1949), Croatian


ˇ                    Medical doctor

ˇ                    Professor at the Institute of Forensic Medicine, Zagreb



Mr Volodymir YEVINTOV (1945), Ukrainian


ˇ                    Lawyer

ˇ                    Leading Research Fellow at the Institute of State and Law, National Academy of Sciences

ˇ                    Vice-President of the Ukrainian Association for International Law



Mr Ivan ZAKINE (1932), French


ˇ                    Honorary President at the Court of Cassation

ˇ                    Member of the Magistrate High Council

ˇ                    Former Director of Prison Administration

ˇ                    President of the Société Générale des Prisons et de Législation Criminelle



Reporting committee: Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights

Reference to committee: Doc 8403, Reference No. 2386 of 26 May 1999

Draft resolution unanimously adopted by the committee on 26 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, Mr Bartumeu Cassany, Mr Bindig, Mr Bordas, Mr Brejc, Mr Bruce, Mr Bulavinov, Mr Cilevics, Mr Clerfayt, Mr Contestabile, Mr Demetriou, Mr Dimas, Mr Enright, Mrs Err, Mr Floros, Mrs Frimannsdóttir, Mr Fyodorov, Mr Guardans, Mr Gustafsson, Mrs Hajiyeva, Mr Holovaty, Mr Irtemçelik, Mr Jaskiernia, Mr Jurgens, Mr Kelemen, Lord Kirkhill, Mr Kostytsky, Mr S. Kovalev, Mr Kresák, Mr Kroupa, Mrs Krzyzanowska, Mr Lacăo, Mr Lento, Mr Lintner, Mr Lippelt, Mr Loutfi, Mrs Markovic-Dimova, Mr Marty, Mr McNamara, Mr Michel (alternate: Mr About), Mr Moeller, Mrs Nabholz-Haidegger, Mr Olteanu, Mr Pavlov, Mr Pollo, Mrs Postoico, Mrs Pourtaud (alternate: Mr Dreyfus-Schmidt), Mr Rodeghiero, Mrs Roudy, Mr Rustamyan, Mrs Serafini (alternate: Mr Lauricella), Mr Shaklein, Mr Simonsen, Mr Skrabalo, Mr Solé Tura (alternate: Mrs Lopez Gonzales), 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 (alternate: Mr Walendziak), 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 and Mr Cupina

1 Recommendation 1323 (1997) and Order No. 530 (1997). Doc. 7784 of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights of 26 March 1997, “Report on strengthening the machinery of the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment”, rapporteur Mr Jerzy Jaskiernia.

2 See, for example, J. Murdoch, “The functioning of the CPT and development of international norms”, Proceedings of the seminar in Strasbourg from 5 to 7 December 1994, Assessment and perspectives after five years of activities of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT), Geneva, 1995, p. 116.

3 Doc. 7784, paragraphs 61 to 63.

4 Doc. 8306 of 26 January 1999, CM reply to Recommendation 1323 of the Parliamentary Assembly, paragraphs 10.ii and iii.

* See Appendix 1, list of CPT members.

6 8th general report on the CPT’s activities (1997), paragraph 17.

7 10th general report on the CPT’s activities (1999), paragraph 18.

8 Doc. 7784, paragraph 40 and see CPT/Inf (91) 3, paragraph 87.

9 Doc. 7784, paragraph 45 and see particularly CPT/Inf (95) 10, paragraph 26.

10 Rod Morgan and M. Evans, “A European committee for the prevention of torture”, in The challenges of a greater Europe: the Council of Europe and democratic security, La Nuée Bleue Press, Council of Europe, 1996, p. 98.

11 Strasbourg seminar, 7 and 8 November 1988, “The implementation of the ECPT”, Human Rights Law Journal, vol. 10 No. 1-2 p. 172.

12 L. Joinet, Final report, Strasbourg seminar, 7 and 8 November 1988, “The implementation of the ECPT”, Human Rights Law Journal, vol. 10, No. 1-2, p. 182.

13 8th general report on the CPT’s activities (1997), and see CPT/Inf (98) 12.

14 10th general report on the CPT’s activities (1999), CPT/Inf (2000) 13.

15 Doc. 8460 of 9 July 1999, and see Resolution 1082 (1996), “Procedure for examining candidatures for the election of judges to the European Court of Human Rights”, paragraphs 6 and 10.

16 See Resolution 1200 (1999), “Election of judges to the European Court of Human Rights”.

17 C. Nicolay, “Five years of the CPT’s work: now what?”, Proceedings of the seminar in Strasbourg from 5 to 7 December 1994, Implementation of the ECPT. Review and prospects after five years of the CPT’s work, Geneva, 1995, p. 54.

18 Doc. 7784, paragraph 46.

19 Order No. 530 (1997), paragraph 2.ii.

20 Order No. 530 (1997), paragraph 2.iii.

21 Seminar in Strasbourg, 7 and 8 Nov. 1988, “The implementation of the ECPT”, Human Rights Law Journal, vol. 10 No. 1-2 p. 169.