arly interpretations of its provisions to similar provisions in a world-vide instrument such as the Covenant. That did not mean that the decisions handed down under the European Convention should be disregarded altogether, since they were of persuasive weight for determining the meaning of equivalent terms used in the Covenant.
and in terms
54. Neither the European Convention nor the Covenant expressly prohibited corporal punishment. The question hinged on the interpretation of the words "degrading, Athi 7 treatment" in those instruments. It was true that the European Court had held that, that in certain circumstances, corporal punishment could constitute degrading treatment, and had done so in the Isle of Man case. The United Kingdom Goverment would carefully consider what, if any, implications that decision might have for the different circumstances prevailing in the dependent Territories, and the observations made by the members of the Committee would undoubtedly be very helpful in that connexion.
G+K
Art. 7_ Bivi 55. With regard to the specific information requested about the administration of corporal punishment in certain dependent Territories, the United Kingdom would reply T in writing in due course.
3107
56. With regard to the British Indian Ocean Territory and the Sovereign Basc Areas in Cyprus, he said that his Government had not ratified the Covenant in respect of Cyp
Сурги
those two Territories.
57. Referring to the questions asked about the definition of the terms "blasphemy" Au and "sedition", in the context of articles 19-21 of the Covenant, he said that they DTS had been defined in English law and in the laws of the dependent Territories, and the Committee would be informed of the definitions in due course. In the meantime, however, he wished to refer to the definition of the term "geditious intention" in the Sedition and Undesirable Publications Ordinance of the British Virgin Islands, the text of which had been made available to the Committee. He would also like to state in answer to Mr. Bouziri, that mere criticism of the Government was certainly not gedition.
58. He stated, for Mr. Grac frath's information, that the list of circumstances in BEL which freedom of expression was inhibited, which was given in paragraplı 50 of the report by Belize (annex 1) concerning article 19 of the Covenant, was to his knowledge complete.
59. He pointed out to Mr. Hanga and Mr. Prado Vallejo, who had expressed the view ALL that article 20 of the Covenant was not being fully complied with in the Territories, DTS that the United Kingdon had entered a reservation to that article (CCPR/C/2).
Art 25
BEL
60. With regard to the questions put by Mr. Grae frath, Mr. Tomuschat and Mr. Tarnopolsky on the qualifications required for membership of the Legislative Assembly of Belize, he said that the matter would be examined in London and drawn to the attention of the Belize authorities, However, he would like to make one preliminary remark, namely, that since Belize was an English-speaking territory,
debates in the Legislative Asscably were conducted in English, and it was therefore logical that members of the Assembly should be required to low that language.
the
61.
OK +
Mr. Tamopolsky had asked about the United Kingdom's responsibility for ensuring )7; that the dependent Territories complied with the provisions of the Covenant. It was clear in principle that if there was a breach of an obligation in the Covenant by a dependent Territory the United Kingdom might be held internationally responsible
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.