imply that the person concerned might well be convicted and might well suffer inhuman treatment or torture if returned. Under the Convention, the United Kingdom had a formal obligation not to return such a person, but the paragraph implied that the regime might allow the possibility of such returns. It should be noted that, under the Convention, States parties were not allowed any discretion in that regard.
17. Paragraphs 25 to 27 of the report gave fairly detailed information on the Immigration Rules; however, he pointed out that the question of what did or did not constitute refugee status was not relevant to the obligations contained in article 3 of the Convention. Paragraph 26 stated that any claim of likely torture on return to another country would be assessed in relation to the "possible use of exceptional leave". He would appreciate an explanation of the meaning of that term.
•
Where article 6 was concerned, he had been struck by the marked difference between the regime of England, Wales and Scotland and the regime of Northern Ireland with regard to the detention for purposes of questioning of persons suspected of a serious crime. Under the former regime, for example, it was accepted that the detained person had a right to access to a solicitor, but the regime in Northern Ireland was clearly quite different both in law and in practice. The procedures for the questioning of suspects, at least in England, Scotland and Wales, appeared to be fully in keeping with the Convention and he welcomed the commitment of the United Kingdom Government to international cooperation and mutual assistance as indicated in paragraph 58.
19.
With regard to article 10, paragraph 60 referred to training programmes for law enforcement personnel involved in the custody, questioning or treatment of arrested persons. However, it had been pointed out by the Howard League for Penal Reform that no formal instruction was given to such personnel in respect of their international obligations in that regard. Paragraph 61 stated that no formal training was given to health care professionals in the identification of signs of torture: that seemed to him a very weak attitude in so far as meeting the requirements of the Convention was concerned. Не would have hoped that at least some attempt would have been made to train health care professionals to recognize such signs.
20. He had read with great alarm the statement in paragraph 73 that the Government was currently considering what amendments might be made to the rules governing the right of silence in England and Wales. Under the rules that now operated, if an accused person declined to make a statement, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, that refusal could not be commented on in a subsequent criminal trial. However, in Northern Ireland, a different set of rules applied to the interrogation of persons suspected of terrorism and there was in effect no right of silence. He took it that the statement in paragraph 73 implied that the Government was considering extending the regime operating in Northern Ireland to the rest of the United Kingdom. He hoped that that was not, in fact, the case.
21. The report did not give any details on how offences committed by members of the armed forces were dealt with, either in a disciplinary sense or otherwise. In some countries, the armed forces were notorious for being guilty of such offences, but he believed that that was not the situation in
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.