11/21/91
16:01
CAT/C/SR.91 page lev
59. With respect to article 16, she said that she believed that corporal punishment for children in schools was now prohibited in the United Kingdom, but would welcome confirmation of that fact. She also wished to know whether the position was the same throughout the United Kingdom.
60.
She wondered whether the use of strip cells to house suicidal prisoners was psychologically the best way of preventing suicide.
61. To end on a positive note, she said that she considered the provisions for the treatment of the mentally ill in the United Kingdom to be some of the best in Europe.
62. Mr. GIL LAVEDRA said that he associated himself with the comments and questions by the country rapporteur and the alternate country rapporteur and that the report contained extremely detailed and valuable information about points which were important, but might be of secondary interest, such as mental health or child care, while, in other more crucial areas, it was vague and general.
63.
Section 134 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 was clearly vital in prohibiting torture and in making acts of torture punishable under criminal law. It was therefore a matter of regret that the text of section 134 was not included in the report.
-
64. According to paragraph 33 of the report, in cases of serious assaults involving members of the armed forces, "the Chief Officer of Police for the area ... would in consultation with the appropriate commanding officer - decide whether jurisdiction was to be exercised by the Service or by the civilian authorities. In general, offences, solely involving assaults, etc. on civilians would be tried by the civilian authorities and cases solely involving assaults on servicemen would be tried by the Service authorities", He asked what was meant by the words "In general" and requested further clarification on how the decision concerning jurisdiction was actually taken.
65. With regard to article 5 of the Convention, he asked what the actual provisions of section 134 were whereby United Kingdom jurisdiction was established over the offences referred to in article 4 of the Convention, as required by article 5, and further noted from paragraph 39 that the provisions of United Kingdom law did not seem to meet the requirements of article 5, as that paragraph appeared to indicate that jurisdiction was restricted and made no specific mention of jurisdiction over the crime of torture.
66. He endorsed the questions put by Mr. Burns and Ms. Chanet on the system of detention in Northern Ireland and pointed out that the length of time during which persons could be held without trial was certain to give rise to problems, despite the provision for the medical examination of detainees.
67. Mr. DIPANDA MOUELLE expressed his appreciation both for the initial report of the United Kingdom and for the oral introduction by the United Kingdom representative. Although most of his concerns had already been expressed by other members of the Committee, he requested further information on the independent advisers referred to in paragraph 23 of the report dealing with the provision, under Schedule 2 to the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary