The CHAIRMAN, speaking as alternate country rapporteur, thanked the United Kingdom delegation for its very full report, as well as the organizations which had provided additional information. He endorsed the questions which had been put by Mr. Burns, the country rapporteur.
36. Referring to article 2 of the Convention and paragraphs 13 to 15 of the United Kingdom report, he said that, although the relevant legislative and judicial measures had been clearly indicated, he would welcome further information on relevant administrative measures. He also asked about the meaning of the term "assault" in Scots law, as used in paragraph 13, and whether it included torture and other ill-treatment with which the Convention was concerned.
37. With regard to article 5, paragraph 2, and article 7, paragraph 1, of the Convention, he requested information on the application of provisions relating to the non-extradition of a person who had committed an act of torture and the trial of such a person within the country.
38. Like Mr. Burns, he had been surprised by the contents of paragraph 61 of the report. Even in a situation where there were no identified instances of torture, he did not think it could be concluded that it was unnecessary to provide training to health care and other professionals. The statement made in paragraph 61 seemed to be rather categorical in the light of decisions taken by the European Court of Human Rights in the 1980s and the many allegations of inhuman and cruel treatment in respect of Northern Ireland.
39. Referring to article 11 of the Convention, he requested further information on day-to-day monitoring of the implementation of legislation.
40. With regard to Northern Ireland, he asked whether, in view of the prima facie case in relation to Mr. Gillen, any legal or disciplinary action had been taken against the alleged perpetrators of the ill-treatment and whether the victim had been awarded compensation.
41.
Mr. SORENSEN, referring to paragraph 3 of the report and the visit of the Council of Europe committee, of which he had been a member, to the United Kingdom in 1990, said that the report of that committee had been submitted to the United Kingdom Government in spring 1990. The report would remain confidential unless the United Kingdom authorities decided to publish it and he expressed the hope that they would decide to do so.
42. Mr. KHITRIN said that the fact that the report did not contain the national legislation which had a direct bearing on the implementation of the Convention detracted from its quality. Did the legislation guarantee the prohibition and elimination of torture as defined in the Convention? In that connection, he wished to have the full text of section 134 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.
43.
With regard to article 2 of the Convention, he asked what measures had been taken to prevent acts of torture being committed within the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom, in particular in Northern Ireland. What officials were entitled to make arrests and what were the guarantees of an arrested person in custody? He also requested further clarification of the rules governing the right to silence.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.