HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE EXAMINES THE REPORT OF JORDAN

The Human Rights Committee this morning completed its consideration of the fifth periodic report of Jordan on its implementation of the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Presenting the report, Saja Majali, Permanent Representative of Jordan to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said that since the presentation of its fourth periodic report, many changes had taken place in the region which had had serious ramifications for Jordan. In spite of the conflicts and wars around it and the influx of refugees, the Government stressed its resolve to progress with social and political reforms and to reinforce the human rights system. As part of reforms, the Government had passed constitutional amendments to ensure the balance and separation of powers. It had developed laws on political parties, elections and public gatherings, reinforcing the rights of citizens. It had passed a law to limit the mandates of courts, namely to ensure trying civilians in front of civilian courts. One novelty was the establishment of the independent election commission, and of oversight institutions for combatting corruption. The Government also focused on the development of the judiciary and enforcement of the rule of law.

In the ensuing discussion, Experts welcomed the 2011 amendments to the Constitution, namely the establishment of the Constitutional Court and the Independent Electoral Commission, as well as the adoption of the national human rights action plan. Experts expressed concern that the constitutional reform had not touched the religious judicial system and that religious courts did not accept the supremacy of Covenant provisions. They noted that the existing Personal Status Act reflected the Sharia law. Other issues raised by Experts included the application of the death penalty despite the de facto moratorium, lack of comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation, the high rate of early marriage, the right of women to transmit their nationality to their children, domestic violence and non-criminalisation of marital rape, protective custody of women, the rise in honour killings of women, voluntary termination of pregnancy, representation of women in public life, the protection of migrant workers and particularly domestic workers, the protection of Syrian and Palestinian refugees, especially the protection of Syrian refugee children from economic exploitation, violation of the principle of non-refoulement, definition of terrorist acts, use of force and torture by members of security forces, access to detention centres by civil society organizations, freedom of consciousness, legal equality of women and men, independence of the judiciary, particularly the jurisdiction and wide powers of the State Security Court, and peaceful assembly and freedom of association.

In her concluding remarks, Ms. Majali reiterated Jordan’s commitment to human rights and to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Fundamental rights were part and parcel of the country’s reform process and the Government would continue to advance in that regard. The Government was looking forward to the Committee’s concluding observations, which it would take in the most serious way.

Ivana Jeliæ, Vice-Chairperson of the Committee, emphasised the achievements of Jordan, among them the establishment of the Constitutional Court, the Independent Electorate Commission, acceptance and general treatment of refugees, and adoption of a new human rights action plan. Still, there were many challenges, such as the ratification of the Optional Protocols to the Covenant, use of force by security forces, the balance between security requests and human rights protection, the application of the death penalty, non-refoulement, the position of women, and lack of comprehensive anti-discrimination.

The delegation of Jordan consisted of representatives from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Expatriates, the Ministry of Social Development, the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of Justice, the Supreme Judges Department, the National Commission for Women, and the Permanent Mission of Jordan to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

The Committee will next meet in public on Monday, 23 October, at 10 a.m. to discuss methods of work.

Report

The fifth periodic report of Jordan can be read here: CCPR/C/JOR/Q/5.

Presentation of the Report

SAJA MAJALI, Permanent Representative of Jordan to the United Nations Office at Geneva, stressed the serious intention of the Government of Jordan to promote human rights in all fields of life. In that endeavour it relied on the country’s historical heritage and comprehensive legal reforms. Since the presentation of its fourth periodic report, many changes had taken place in the region, which had had serious ramifications for Jordan. In spite of the conflicts and wars around it and the influx of refugees, the Government underlined its resolve to progress with social and political reforms and to reinforce the human rights system. Jordan was moving ahead with its political development trajectory. Its commitment was clear in its legislative and institutional system. All branches of the Government provided legal and administrative guarantees for human rights and civil liberties. In the context of reforms, the Government had passed constitutional amendments to ensure the balance and separation of powers. It had developed laws on political parties, elections and public gatherings, reinforcing the rights of citizens. It had passed a law to limit the mandates of courts, namely to ensure trying civilians in front of civilian courts. One novelty was the establishment of the independent election commission, and of oversight institutions for combatting corruption. The Government also focused on the development of the judiciary and the enforcement of the rule of law. Amendments to the Civic and Criminal Code aimed at simplifying legal procedures and the provision of fair trial conditions. The Law on Domestic Violence stipulated mandatory reporting of domestic violence. The Law on Persons with Disabilities was in line with the Convention and international standards. There were also laws governing civil dispute settlements and the independence of the judiciary.

The position of a coordinator for human rights had been established by the Government. In 2016, the Government had launched a comprehensive human rights action plan in order to make effective the human rights system in the country, with a focus on vulnerable groups, such as children, women, elderly and persons with disabilities. Jordan attached great importance to the freedom of expression and opinion, and to that end it had adopted a law on access to information, prohibiting any limitation on the right of journalists to obtain information. Administrative justice monitored the legality of administrative detention orders, and ensured a fair trial. The rights of women, children and the family were guaranteed, especially in the areas of marriage, divorce, guardianship and inheritance. Within the framework of the new Electorate Law, parliamentary seats were allocated to minorities and women. An electronic voting system had been introduced to guarantee the highest level of transparency, as well as wider powers at the local level in the area of voting.

The great influx of refugees, especially of Syrians, had presented a great burden for Jordan, leading to adverse effects in the provision of water, sanitation and health services. The Government called on the international community to support Jordan in hosting refugees and to ensure their return to their home countries. The Government would not shirk its moral duty and it would continue to provide migrants with humanitarian assistance. The Rukban refugee camp was not on Jordanian territory and it was, therefore, not the responsibility of the Jordanian State, Ms. Majali concluded.


Questions by Committee Experts

Experts welcomed the 2011 amendments to the Constitution, namely the establishment of the Constitutional Court and the Independent Electoral Commission. They also welcomed the adoption of the national human rights action plan.

As for the practical application of the provisions of the Covenant in the domestic legal system, there was no specific constitutional provision that clarified the status of the Covenant in the domestic legal system. How were the provisions of the Covenant applied in the domestic legal system? Were there examples when courts specifically referred to Covenant provisions? Did the Constitutional Court have a mandate to review the compatibility of legislative provisions with the Covenant?

The constitutional reform had not touched the religious judicial system. Did religious courts accept the supremacy of Covenant provisions? The existing Personal Status Act reflected the Sharia law. Was there any discussion on the elaboration of a unified law on personal status matters?

The de facto moratorium on the death penalty had been in place since 2007. Experts regretted that the death penalty had been applied twice since then. Was the State party considering the ratification of the first Optional Protocol on individual communications?

What was the budget allocated to the National Centre for Human Rights and was it equipped to carry out its work throughout the country’s territory? Was it able to follow-up on its recommendations to the Government?

There seemed to be no comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation, going beyond religious, ethnic and linguistic issues. As for discriminatory practices towards women, reports had been received about the fact that between 12 and 13 per cent of all marriages were early marriages. Was the country reviewing its position with a view to prohibit early marriages?

Experts also expressed concern about the right of Jordanian women to transmit their nationality to their children, and potential statelessness that could result from that problem. What specific steps had been taken to reform the Law on Nationality and to mitigate the effects of this discriminatory practice? What was the justification for the application of the Sharia law to non-Muslim women?

Other concerns included freedom of women to work and the absence of women in senior judiciary positions.

As for the protection of migrant workers, Jordan had not adopted comprehensive international instruments, such as the International Labour Organization Convention 189 on domestic workers. What steps had been taken to ratify that convention and what was the justification for the Government’s position? What steps had been taken to remedy the practice of deportation of migrant workers and ensure that they had access to justice? How were crimes against domestic workers prosecuted?

With respect to Syrian asylum seekers, did the State party envisage revising its policy on acceptance of refugees stranded on its borders? What measures had been taken to address the living conditions in the refugee camps of Rukban and Hadalat on the border between Syria and Jordan, namely access to water, sanitation and healthcare?

Experts welcomed the removal of the article of the Penal Code that allowed the perpetrator of marital rape to remain unpunished. However, there were significant gaps in dealing with the cases of domestic violence due to the lack of training for law enforcement officials. The police approach to victims of violence had serious shortcomings. Did the Government have plans to ensure the practical implementation of the 2017 law dealing with domestic violence? What was the training provided to police officers? How many police officers had been prosecuted for their inappropriate treatment of victims of domestic violence?

The Family Protection Bill gave the authorities power to detain perpetrators of domestic violence for 24 hours in order to protect victims. Civil society had reported that the bill lacked implementation guidelines. How many persons had been detained under that bill?

It appeared that marital rape was not criminalised. Were there any plans to criminalise it?

Protective custody of women had not ended, leading to administrative detention of women threatened with marital or family violence. Women in administrative detention represented 65 per cent of all female inmates. What measures had been taken to terminate the protective custody of women?

There had been a 53 per cent rise in honour killings of women in Jordan. The law allowed perpetrators to have their sentences reduced or waived if the family of the victims decided to drop charges, which in practice condoned murder committed in the family context. What measures did the State party plan to undertake to completely eradicate the practice of honour killings?

The Anti-Terrorism Law of 2014 broadened the definition of terrorist acts and could be used to stifle dissent. Was there any intention to revisit the current definition?

The legislation prohibited any termination of pregnancy. What was the rate of unsafe abortions? Was there any intention to expand the rules of termination of pregnancy to protect the life of the mother?

Experts raised concerns about the use of force by members of security forces; alleged use of torture on the part of security forces, particularly in detention places; lack of oversight; and the use of confessions made under torture. Inquiries into the alleged use of torture did not seem to have borne fruit as no sentences had been handed down. How did the State party ensure consistency and harmony of different oversight mechanisms in that respect?

The definition of torture in Jordan’s domestic legislation seemed to be inconsistent with international standards because torture was not treated as a crime but as on offence. The State Security Law allowed the general director of public security to examine cases of torture as offences, which was a flagrant violation of the separation of powers. In addition, Jordanian legislation did not recognise the responsibility of the State in any cases of torture and, thus, did not recognise the right to reparation.

As for the access to detention centres by civil society organizations, was it true that those visits were limited to correctional rehabilitation centres and did not include temporary detention centres?

Replies by the Delegation

The delegation explained that the fact that Jordan had ratified the Covenant had allowed it to adopt laws in line with the Covenant provisions. For example, the Covenant established that each person had his or her own legal personality, which was observed in Jordanian laws. There was complete compatibility between national laws and the Covenant. The fact that there was no legal text deriving from the Covenant did not mean that the provisions of the Covenant were not implemented.

The personal status issues were settled by Sharia courts. Personal status matters of persons belonging to other religious denominations were considered by courts for non-Muslims. Sharia courts could examine cases involving non-Muslims if the non-Muslims consented that the Sharia law could be applied.

The National Centre for Human Rights usually reported to the Prime Minister and the Cabinet had established a mechanism for the implementation of the Centre’s recommendations. The Centre ensured the country’s compliance with its international human rights obligations. The Centre had a wide social representation, including of women and civil society. Once an international instrument became part of the domestic legal system, the Constitutional Court could review the constitutionality of relevant decisions.

The Act on Family Violence of 2008 had been replaced by a new one in 2017 and it should not be referred to. The Family Protection Directorate had organised various lectures and training courses on domestic violence for public security officers, and it had offered family counselling services. There had been coordination with the Public Prosecutor, and a liaison officer for the protection of victims of family violence had been appointed.

As for the death penalty, the delegation emphasised that Jordan was considered a country that strived to promote human rights. It had taken many measures to protect fundamental freedoms and to ensure that national legislation was in line with ratified international human rights instruments. The Criminal Code imposed penalties for crimes, one of them being the death penalty. It deterred crimes from being committed. That penalty and its implementation were compatible with international texts. Indeed, the Covenant stipulated that the death penalty should be confined to the most serious crimes. The application of the death penalty in Jordan could not take place in an arbitrary manner. It could only be imposed on individuals above the age of 18, and it could not be applied to pregnant women or to women who had just given birth. The death penalty was no longer applied to drug-related crimes. According to a recent study, 81 per cent of the Jordanian population supported the retention of the death penalty.

The Prevention of Terrorism Act was a preventive law and it was aimed at preventing the recruitment of terrorists and financing of terrorism, thus living up to Jordan’s international obligations. There was no international agreement on how to define a terrorist act. The one applied by Jordan derived from a definition elaborated by the Arab League. Those arrested under the provisions of the Prevention of Terrorism Act were subject to the provisions of the Criminal Code, which was in line with international standards. But, given the serious nature of terrorist crimes, the Law on State Security Court of 1959 had given security officials the right to arrest for seven days suspects of terrorist crimes.

The Public Security Court had the authority to deal with certain crimes relating to the security of the State and public order. The Police Court was another exceptional court presided over by a colonel and a professional judge. The rulings handed down by exceptional courts could be appealed. Prosecutions in the Police Court complied with the provisions of ordinary courts and international criteria, particularly with the principle of a fair trial. In order to guarantee that different courts worked in accordance with their ranking, a directorate had been set up to monitor their decisions. The Police Court was an integral part of Jordan’s judiciary system and it was not subject to the Public Security Directorate. There were only four cases of torture submitted to the Police Court.

Follow-up Questions by Experts

Did the Family Protection Directorate offer gender sensitive training to law enforcement officials dealing with cases of domestic violence?

Regarding the death penalty, Experts voiced concern that a number of people had recently been executed and that standards of due procedure had not been upheld. It appeared that recent executions were for crimes of sexual assault and thus the death penalty was not being applied for most serious crimes.

Had the Ministry of Labour issued regulations for agricultural workers? What had been done to stop the unlawful and dangerous practice of withholding passports by employers and recruitment agencies? Would the State party consider conducting public awareness campaigns and spreading knowledge about the value of domestic work and the humane treatment of domestic workers?

As for voluntary termination of pregnancy, Experts inquired about the Criminal Code provision that guaranteed mitigating circumstances for women who performed abortion to protect their honour. What was the number of convicted women under the law and what were the sentences handed down?

Did the State party envision striking down the death penalty for espionage, treason, robbery and sale of automatic weapons?

Replies by the Delegation

SAJA MAJALI, Permanent Representative of Jordan to the United Nations Office at Geneva, reminded that Jordan had accepted some 1.6 million Syrian refugees and that the capacities were at the stretching point. Syrian refugees in the Rukban camp were on the Syrian territory and thus were not the responsibility of the Jordanian Government, even though the Jordanian Government did provide them with assistance. Pursuant to its commitments under the Covenant, Jordan protected all the rights of persons living on the territory of Jordan, including Palestinian and Syrian refugees. That issue should be addressed by the Human Rights Committee. The right of return of Palestinians should enable them to return to their country and that emanated from Israel’s obligations.

The 1951 Convention on Refugees was not part of the Committee’s agenda. Refoulement was only applied by Jordan when individuals presented a threat to the country. Jordan had the right to protect and control its borders while respecting the legitimate rights of refugees. It did not resort to collective expulsion of refugees. Syrians in Jordan were able to enjoy their rights in line with international standards and under Jordanian law. As for granting nationality, it depended on Jordan’s international obligations and it was granted by Jordanian magistrates. The country was not party to the conventions on statelessness, Ms. Majali explained. She recalled that this issue should not be examined by the Human Rights Committee.

The delegation clarified that the ability of Jordanian women to pass on their nationality to their children was a sovereign issue. As for training for law enforcement on domestic violence, it was compulsory and gender balance was taken into account. The efforts to improve detention conditions had been undertaken. The National Human Rights Centre carried out periodic visits to detention centres, and the Public Security Directorate monitored those interventions. All human rights organizations were invited to carry out such visits.

Turning to domestic workers, Ms. Majali said she was taken aback by Experts’ comments and reminded that Jordan was one of the first countries to abolish slavery. She asked the Committee to provide further information about alleged abuse of domestic workers in Jordan so that the delegation could follow up on it.

The delegation explained that the Labour Law did not draw any distinction between workers based on gender or nationality. If there was any mistreatment against workers, including confiscation of passports, the Ministry of Labour could shut down those establishments. Foreign recruitment agencies were governed by a new law which aimed at strengthening the protection of domestic workers, with a very clear decision that protected workers’ right to leave the unsatisfactory workplace.

The Government aimed to strengthen shelters for women and the provision of legal aid to victims of domestic violence or trafficking. Shelters did not entail any form of administrative detention. The Legal Assistance Council was in charge of providing legal aid to all those who required it.

With respect to the representation of women, there were 18 per cent of women in the judiciary, and 25 per cent of women in municipal positions. As a result of the 2017 elections, women now held 29 per cent of municipal and provincial level posts. Women made up 35 per cent of all political party membership in the country.

Second Round of Questions by Experts

Concerning the protection of refugees, Experts expressed concerns about the systematic denial of entry to Palestinian asylum-seeking families fleeing the Syrian Arab Republic and on reports of cases of dozens of Palestinian families deported back to Syria, and the failure to register Palestinian refugee children fleeing conflict immediately after birth and to provide them with access to other civil documentation regardless of their status. Another concern was the arbitrary revocation of Jordanian citizenship from citizens of Palestinian origin.

Even though Jordan had gone out of its way to provide assistance to some 1.2 or 1.3 million Syrian refugees, there were still some outstanding legal issues, such as obtaining of documents by refugees and the violation of the principle of non-refoulement.

Turning to freedom of religion, Experts reminded that Jordanian laws did not fully provide for the enjoyment of freedom of religion or belief. The Personal Status Act prevented the marriage of those who renounced Islam even though the other party was non-Muslim. Did Muslims who renounced Islam enjoy the same rights as all other Muslims?

As for the protection of persons deprived of their liberty, what steps were taken to investigate and explain deaths in detention? Was evidence gathered through torture null and void in courts? To what extent were complaint boxes in detention centres used?

It seemed that the number of women held in administrative detention was very high. Was that correct? The Law on Crime Prevention of 1954 did not seem to conform to international standards and perhaps it was time to reform it, Experts suggested.

The right to protest and the space for civil society were limited by many restrictions. After the Arab Spring of 2011, the law on public gatherings had been changed. In many instances public protests had been banned and disrupted, and persons involved in demonstrations had been detained. What was the delegation’s response to that sombre assessment?

What was the new plan for security legislation? What regional definition of terrorist act was used in Jordan?

Turning to the right to a fair trial, Experts inquired about the right to legal counsel, which was an essential component of an effective justice system. What additional steps was the State party planning to take to regulate legal aid and make it more widely available under the new framework for legal aid?

As for equality before the law, Experts reminded that in Sharia courts which had jurisdiction over marriage, divorce, child custody, adoption, guardianship and inheritance, the testimony of one man equalled that of two women. In light of that imbalance, would the State party take measures to ensure equality of men and women in Sharia courts? Were there mechanisms or processes that enabled the State party to review the court system in line with fair trial guarantees?

With respect to the appointment of members of the Constitutional Court and since the King appointed them, how could the Court be considered independent under the Covenant? What measures would Jordan take in the future to ensure the separation of powers?

Experts reminded that in 1994 and 2010 the Human Rights Committee had recommended that Jordan abolish the State Security Court, which was still in existence. The State Security Court was not independent from the executive and it had a close relationship with the Jordanian General Intelligence Directorate. The Anti-Terrorism Law of 2014 had broadened the scope of the State Security Court’s jurisdiction to include non-violent offences by defining terrorism as “disturbing relations with a foreign state.” Were amendments planned to ensure that non-violent civilian offenders were not brought before the State Security Court? What was being done to increase judicial independence in Jordan, especially with respect to the General Intelligence Directorate’s influence on the State Security Court?

As for child labour, in light of the recent arrival of Syrian refugees to Jordan, UNICEF had estimated that 30,000 Syrian children were currently working in Jordan. What measures were being taken to protect vulnerable refugee children from exploitative child labour and human trafficking?

Turning to the right to peaceful assembly and freedom of association, Experts reminded that Jordan had failed to reach a consensus on forming a complaints council. What was the Government doing to ensure that the council was established and that the process was protected from political interference and obstacles? What was the number of prosecuted journalists and bloggers? What was the timeline for amending the Societies Act?

There seemed to have been no prior consultation with civil society when preparing the State party’s report. Would the Committee’s concluding observations be made available to the public?

Experts clarified that the scope of the Covenant applied to persons belonging to the State’s territory, which included refugees and stateless persons.

Replies by the Delegation

The delegation explained that legal amendments to the Criminal Code treated the offence of torture and raised the minimum sentence to one year in prison. If torture led to illness or serious harm, the punishment was hard labour. The main aim of the national action plan for human rights was to protect the right to life and to ensure the physical integrity of persons in line with Jordan’s international obligations. There was nothing in the law that impeded victims of torture from receiving compensation.

The Family Violence Act of 2015 provided for additional protection of women and members of the family, as well as the establishment of shelters. The Government was currently working on ways to decrease the use of protective custody for women. Women could ask to end their marriage in case of domestic violence, even in the case of only threat of domestic violence. Marital rape constituted an act of aggression against women.

Medical doctors determined conditions under which women could voluntarily terminate pregnancy and there was no criminal liability for that. National legislation on abortion was in full compliance with the principle of the protection of life of the foetus.

According to the Personal Status Act, marriage could be concluded only by persons who were at least 15 years old. Courts had to investigate that the two parties concluding marriage were marrying out of free will. Early marriage should not lead to girls’ dropping out of school. Relevant experts in the field had been consulted when preparing legislation on marriage. The influx of migration had brought various marriage customs which the Government dealt with through public awareness campaigns. Jordan did not have any legal prevention of equality between men and women.

As for the registration of children born outside marriage, regulations were in place to allow persons to prove their lineage through official documentation. The same procedure was applied to refugee children. Jordan had a very unique experience in that area. Sharia courts for family reconciliation had been set up in refugee camps in order to facilitate birth registration and proof of marriage.

Turning to freedom of consciousness, the delegation explained that when a Muslim chose to covert to another religion, he or she would not lose any civic rights and liberties. As for the testimony of women, the Koranic verse was sacrosanct and could not be refuted. The testimony of one man which equalled to the testimony of two women was a general rule, but judges could use the testimony of only one woman. The Koranic verse could not be interpreted superficially and if the testimony of the woman contradicted the man’s testimony, then the man’s testimony would be invalidated.

Jordan had reinforced the right to peaceful assembly. But there was a need to distinguish between authorised public gatherings and those that disrupted and sabotaged public life. The criteria set out in the Code of Criminal Procedure governed the right to a fair trial. The Code of Criminal Procedure explicitly stipulated that defendants had the right to legal counsel. All death or hard labour sentences could be appealed. If defendants could not afford a lawyer, they were assigned a lawyer at the expense of the State.

The National Commission for Women was preparing a strategy to improve the participation of women in high-level positions in the public sector. The Commission had organised training courses for women to prepare them for assuming key posts.

SAJA MAJALI, Permanent Representative of Jordan to the United Nations Office at Geneva, repeated that the Jordanian Government was of the view that the Human Rights Committee was not in charge of monitoring the implementation of refugee conventions. Ms. Majali reminded that Jordan was the largest host of refugees per capita. The refugee population constituted 29 per cent of the entire population. The presence of such a large refugee population had had adverse economic effects on the country. The Government had over the years developed a number of plans to deal with the refugee crisis in a sustainable way.

Child protection, including protection from child labour, was indeed one of the most important challenges for the Jordanian Government as more than half of all Syrian refugees were children under the age of 18. Jordan urged the international community to help it strengthen its resilience in order to provide assistance to refugees. Ms. Majali explained that many Government bodies had implemented measures to protect Syrian refugee children from child labour and economic exploitation through education. Around 100,000 Syrian children attended school in Jordan.

Concluding Remarks

SAJA MAJALI, Permanent Representative of Jordan to the United Nations Office at Geneva, reiterated Jordan’s commitment to human rights and to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Fundamental rights were part and parcel of the country’s reform process. The Government would continue to advance in that regard. The delegation was ready to provide many more answers to Experts’ questions and would provide the rest of them in writing. The Government was looking forward to the Committee’s concluding observations, which it would take in the most serious way. Ms. Majali also thanked Jordanian civil society for their work.

IVANA JELIÆ, Vice-Chairperson of the Committee, thanked the delegation for the very useful and constructive dialogue and its eagerness to answer all of the questions. She reminded that the delegation had 48 hours to provide additional information. Ms. Jeliæ emphasised the achievements of Jordan, among them the establishment of the Constitutional Court, the Independent Electorate Commission, acceptance and general treatment of refugees, and adoption of a new human rights action plan. Still, there were many challenges, such as the ratification of the Optional Protocols to the Covenant, use of force by security forces, the balance between security requests and human rights protection, the application of the death penalty, non-refoulement, the position of women, and lack of comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation.



For use of the information media; not an official record

CT/17/36E