UNITED NATIONS

Press Release


xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
CAT
25th session
15 November 2000
Morning






    Government Delegation Questioned on Alleged Detention,
    Maltreatment of Political Opposition and Demonstrators


    The Committee against Torture began consideration this morning of a third periodic report of Belarus, with Experts from the panel querying a three-member Government delegation, among other things, on reported detention and maltreatment of members of the political opposition and alleged arrest and ill-treatment of persons participating in political demonstrations.

    The Committee also asked for details on various types of detention, including "police custody" and "administrative detention", and asked how long detainees could be held and what access they had to doctors, lawyers, and to their families. In addition, it asked about allegations from non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that State officials enjoyed impunity for acts of maltreatment carried out against political opponents; and reports that the judiciary was not independent of the President of the Republic and officials of his political regime.

    The delegation of Belarus is to respond to the questions at the Committee's meeting beginning at 3 p.m. on Thursday, 17 November. The delegation is headed by Alexander Ivanovsky, Deputy Attorney-General of Belarus, and includes Vladimir Malevich, Deputy Permanent Representative of the Permanent Mission of Belarus to the United Nations Office at Geneva; and Sergei Anoshko, First Secretary of the Permanent Mission.

    Mr. Ivanovsky, introducing the report, said among other things that Belarus had withdrawn its reservation to article 20 of the Convention and was considering the possibility of withdrawing various reservations to the Geneva Conventions. He added that reforms were being made to the Penal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure, and the court system.

    Belarus, as one of the 123 States parties to the Convention, is required to submit periodic reports to the Committee. States parties customarily also send Government delegations to answer the questions of the Committee's 10 Experts.

    The Committee will reconvene at 3 p.m. to hear responses from a delegation of Armenia to questions put by Committee members Tuesday.

    The third periodic report of Belarus

    The report (CAT/C/34/Add.12) summarizes the status of implementation of the Convention and reviews relevant changes in national legislation. Among other things, it remarks that there is no definition of "torture" in national legislation, but that under article 15 of the Act on International Treaties, "generally recognized principles of international law and standards set out in international treaties to which Belarus is a party and which have entered into force form part of the law applicable in the territory of the Republic of Belarus. Hence, application of the Convention draws on the concept as described in Article 1 of the Convention".

    The report states that the Criminal Code establishes criminal responsibility for a series of crimes "which, in the light of Article 1 of the Convention, can be considered to constitute torture"; that the Immigration Act and Refugees Act protect against the return of persons to countries where they are in danger of suffering torture; that the Code of Criminal Procedure contains a number of safeguards for persons under investigation or detention; that there is a direct prohibition against extracting testimony from accused or other persons by means of violence, threats, or other unlawful means, and that evidence obtained in violation of the law has no legal force. Article 60 of the Constitution provides that citizens are entitled to seek compensation through the courts for both property damage and moral injury, the report notes.

    Introduction of report

    ALEXANDER IVANOVSKY, Deputy Attorney-General of Belarus, said, among other things, that Belarus adhered consistently to human values, and that human rights were the highest value and objective of society and the State according to the Constitution. The Constitution also recognized the priority of generally accepted principles of international law and required that domestic legislation conform with them; international treaties ratified by the country did have legal force in the country. Belarus defended the rights and freedoms recognized in such treaties.

    Belarus had withdrawn its reservation to article 20 of the Convention, and was considering the possibility of withdrawing various reservations to the Geneva Conventions, Mr. Ivanovsky said. Legislation related to refugees, foreigners, and illegal entrants to the country also had been modified to better reflect the standards of the Convention. Someone applying as a refugee would not be returned to a country where he faced the possibility of ill-treatment.

    Reforms to the Penal Code and Code of Criminal Procedure had been undertaken, Mr. Ivanovsky said; such matters as crimes against humanity and deportation not in accordance with the law, slavery, disappearances, torture, and acts of cruelty carried out on the basis of race or ethnicity or political conviction or religious belief, along with other offenses, had been specified and prohibited. Currently, the nation's court system was being reformed to strengthen it and bring about its true independence, he said. One aim was to protect those bringing cases for human-rights violations.

    The Procurator-General and Procurators under him were the prime officials responsible for human-rights matters, Mr. Ivanovsky said; some 33 complaints had been filed with the Procurators over the past nine months, for example, charging violations of political rights. Over 700 complaints of violations of the rights of detainees and prisoners had been filed in recent years. Some 13 people had been liberated after the Procurator-General had found they were held illegitimately. Because the country was in economic "transition", it was facing difficulties in providing appropriate prison facilities, Mr. Ivanovsky said, and overcrowding was a problem, along with the incidence of diseases such as tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS; Belarus hoped international assistance could help alleviate this problem.

    Discussion

    FELICE GAER, the Committee Expert serving as rapporteur on the situation in Belarus, welcomed visits to the country by Special Rapporteurs of the Commission on Human Rights. She said the third periodic report appeared to focus largely on legislation rather than on implementation and on the actual situation in the country, and that it also lacked responses to concerns cited by the Committee in the past.

    Ms. Gaer asked, among other things, if more could be done to establish a precise legal definition and crime of torture reflecting the standards of the Convention; if detention could extend up to six months from the date of arrest, or three days -- a matter about which there was some confusion on the occasion of the second report and which was not clarified in the current report; what were the role and occasion for "police custody", which apparently could last from two to 18 months: what sort of access to doctors, lawyers and family were allowed to persons held under police custody; what "administrative arrest" was, exactly, under which persons such as demonstrators apparently could be held for up to 10 days; if persons could be refouled if they faced possible torture under grounds not covered by relevant legislation, such as political opinion or gender; and if expulsion decisions could be challenged.

    Ms. Gaer also asked about details of statistics given about persons convicted and punished for incidences of torture, and why the numbers had doubled over the past five years; who were these people and what had they done? She noted that the International Helsinki Federation alleged that members of the political opposition in Belarus were frequently held in detention for long periods on questionable charges, and that police routinely failed to investigate complaints about such detentions; and that medical examinations had revealed evidence of maltreatment, such as beatings with truncheons. Was this true, and what was being done about it? She asked about political demonstrations, particularly in July and October 1999, and March 2000, and the previous weekend, about which there were reports that demonstrators had been detained and that before release there was frequent maltreatment of detainees, and that those maltreated included a former Prime Minister of the country; that there were beatings, threats, and electric shocks to induce guilty pleas; cells with cold temperatures and flooded floors; and food deprivation of youthful political detainees.

    Ms. Gaer asked about reported disappearances in the country, citing four specific cases; about beatings on the street reportedly carried out by paramilitary groups of fascist ideology against Jews, Roma, and political opposition figures; and if, as alleged, there was a failure of police to investigate such attacks.

    Serving as second rapporteur on the situation in Belarus was Committee Expert PETER THOMAS BURNS, who asked, among other things, if legislation outlined in the report was in fact enforced, as information provided by NGOs such as Amnesty International suggested that there was a gap between standards and the application of laws and protections; if police and judicial authorities did not respond to requests for investigations and for information, as alleged; if there was what amounted to a state of impunity for certain State officials in Belarus; if there was, as alleged, an absence of judicial independence, because, among other things, the President appointed the senior judges of the courts, who then appointed junior judges; if lawyers were in fact not independent, as they were dependent for their livings on the Ministry of Justice, which had been known to hinder the activities of lawyers who previously had appeared on behalf of prominent members of the political opposition.

    Mr. Burns also asked if women prisoners were held separately from male prisoners, and if the guards of women prisoners were men or women; if police and detention officials and prison guards were sufficiently educated in human rights and anti-torture standards and if suitable standards were enforced by those in charge; if immigration officers were specifically instructed about their obligations under article 3 of the Convention; what the "special militia force", the AMAP was, what it did, and who controlled it, as several NGOs charged that much of the maltreatment of detainees occurred under the AMAP; what the definition of a "hooligan" was, as the word came up in the report and allegations had been made that "hooligan" often was used in reference to members of the political opposition; and how many prisons there were in the country, and what kind of medical services were provided in them.

    Other Committee members also put questions. They asked, among other things, about how many forms of pre-trial detention areas existed and what the maximum length of custody was in each of the establishments; what were the conditions of detention, as there were reports that in some establishments no mattresses or blankets were provided and that there were shortages of heat and natural light; if medical examinations were carried out on entry to such facilities; if the prison population in fact had dropped, or if amnesties had been made up for by a greater intake of new prisoners, as there were continued reports of prison overcrowding; if the Procurator General was independent and how he was appointed; and who was required to pay compensation if an agent of the State was found to have perpetrated torture.



    * *** *