COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE BEGINS REVIEW OF REPORT OF GUATEMALA

The Committee against Torture this morning began its consideration of the third periodic report of Guatemala on the efforts of that country to give effect to the provisions of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

Carlos Ramiro Martínez, Permanent Representative of Guatemala to the United Nations Office at Geneva, introduced the report, saying that the 10 years since the signing of the peace agreements had not been easy ones, and that there were still many things that had to be done before the country could realize the goals it had set for itself. One of the most important achievements was the re-launching of the peace agreements in February 2004, followed by the framework agreement approved in August 2005. Guatemala had also elaborated a National Human Rights Policy and a Policy for Human Rights Education. In September 2005, an office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights had been established in the country, at the request of the Guatemalan Government. In April 2006, a proposal was submitted to the United Nations Secretary-General to establish a commission to investigate illegal groups and clandestine security forces in Guatemala. In addition, the Government had drafted a proposed National Plan of Action to find those who had disappeared in the past conflict.

Claudio Grossman, the Committee Expert serving as Rapporteur for the report of Guatemala, said that the Commission for the Investigation of Illegal Bodies and Clandestine Security Structures that was being set up was very important, but what was the possibility that this body would be approved soon? Acknowledging the important work that had been undertaken by Guatemala to reform the National Civil Police, and how hard that was to accomplish, he remained concerned that 3,000 new military forces had been put in to undertake security duties in Guatemala. The army should not be dealing with internal security responsibilities, he said.

Alexander Kovalev, the Committee Expert serving as Co-Rapporteur for the report of Guatemala, said that the delegation's presentation represented quite clearly the Government's will to address the issues raised by the Committee. He wondered, however, when the planned Consultative Commission on the Penitentiary System would actually be in place. Noting that under the Children and Adolescents Act of 2003, minors under 18 years of age were not criminally liable, he was concerned that minors between the ages of 13 and 18 could still be tried criminally under special procedures.

Other Committee Experts also raised a series of questions on topics including sexual violence against women in police stations; medical examinations for detainees; forced expulsions; firearms control; and the strange fact that 90 per cent of asylum-seekers reportedly stopped the asylum proceedings on their own initiative.

Also representing the delegation of Guatemala were Edgar Lorenzo Esocobar, Vice Minister of National Defence, Ilse Alvarez Ortíz, Vice Minister of the Interior, Victor Manuel Rivera Woltke, Judge of the Supreme Court of Justice, Sandra Elizabeth Zayas Gil, Sub-Director for Crime Prevention of the National Civil Police, along with other members of the delegation and members of the Permanent Mission of Guatemala to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

The delegation will return to the Committee at 3 p.m. on Friday, 5 May, to provide its response to the questions raised this morning.

Guatemala is among the 141 States parties to the Convention and as such it must present periodic reports to the Committee on how it is implementing the provisions of the Convention.

When the Committee reconvenes at 3 p.m., it will hear the answers of Georgia to the questions posed by the Experts on Wednesday, 3 May.

Report of Guatemala

The third periodic report of Guatemala (CAT/C/74/Add.1) says there is no systematic practice of human rights violations or of torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in Guatemala. On the contrary, steps are being taken to strengthen the national bodies and agencies responsible for the administration of justice and the protection of human rights. This process is accompanied by human rights training for public officials, with the ultimate objective of helping the State to fulfil its constitutional role as the guarantor of Guatemalan’s basic rights. Legal provisions to govern the care of young persons in detention, set forth in the Organizational Handbook on the Programme of Care, Training and Rehabilitation of Young Persons in Conflict With the Law, were approved recently by the Social Welfare Department. The Migration Department has a free phone service for receiving complaints of abuses committed against migrants, and the Office of Professional Accountability is responsible for conducting investigations into such cases.

Under the Witness Protection Act, the report says, the Public Prosecutor’s Office is empowered to protect anyone who may have undergone or witnessed an unlawful act such as torture. The procedure followed by its Logistics Support Department provides support for both victims and witnesses from a multidisciplinary team comprising psychologists, psychiatrists, general practitioners and security staff. The victims or witnesses are transferred to a safe place, provided with the requisite security measures, and, if necessary, moved outside the country. The Peace Secretariat reports that it is implementing a pilot project offering moral and material assistance to people in the indigenous communities who have suffered violations, principally those in which massacres occurred. Most of the beneficiaries suffered torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. In addition, it is running reconciliation workshops that have given rise to psychosocial, legal and moral support activities and moves to return property.

Presentation of Report

CARLOS RAMIRO MARTÍNEZ, Permanent Representative of Guatemala to the United Nations Office at Geneva, said that despite efforts to improve the institutional and legal framework in Guatemala, there was still much work to be done and many challenges remained. It had to be recognized that the 10 years since the signing of the peace agreements had not been easy ones, and that there were still many things that had to be done before the country could realize the goals it had set for itself. Still, it was important to note that there was a real political will on the part of the State to address those issues, and that had made it possible to bring about consensus and coordinate action on the part of the population.

In terms of human rights, one of the most important achievements was the re-launching of the peace agreements in February 2004, followed by the framework agreement approved in August 2005, the Permanent Representative noted. Guatemala had also elaborated a National Human Rights Policy and a Policy for Human Rights Education. In September 2005, an office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights had been established in the country, at the request of the Guatemalan Government. In April 2006, a proposal was submitted to the United Nations Secretary-General to establish a commission to investigate illegal groups and clandestine security forces in Guatemala. In addition the Government had drafted a proposed National Plan of Action to find those that had disappeared in the past conflict.

Guatemala had also continued to carry out a policy of acknowledgement of Government responsibility for grave human rights violations, notably evidenced in public apologies carried out by the President and Vice President as part of the reparation for victims. Those acts were accompanied by economic reparations as well as psychosocial assistance to victims' families.

Response by Delegation

The delegation responded to a series of written questions prepared by the Committee in advance and sent to the State party beforehand, saying that, with regards to the ability to invoke a superior's order to justify torture, under the Constitution that was not allowed.

Concerning the duration of pre-trial imprisonment, the Constitution provided the overall framework, along with the Criminal Procedure Code, the delegation said. Prisons had to be made available within a certain time period. That coordination and integration of different bodies such as the Minister of the Interior, the Civil Police and the Supreme Court of Justice had been used to introduce courts of first instance so that people were brought before a judge within the specified period of time. That measure would be extended to the rest of the country. An individual had to be brought before a judge within 6 hours, and interrogated within 24 hours, all over the territory, as provided for by the Constitution of Guatemala.

With regard to avoiding the excessive use of force in the cases of expulsions of asylum-seekers, there had been no such expulsions, the delegation affirmed. Providing statistics requested by the Committee, the delegation said that in 2002, there had been 11 requests for asylum, 10 men and 1 woman; in 2003, there had been 12; in 2004 there had been 15 requests, 11 men and 4 women; in 2005 there had been 28 requests, 26 men and 2 women; in 2006 there were 13. There were 8 refugees registered since 2002. Many of the requests were turned down.

Speaking with regards to the number of allegations or requests for action that had been submitted and what steps had been taken to deal with them by the Human Rights Office of the National Civil Police and the Office for Victim Care, the delegation affirmed that they had received no specific reports of torture in general and had no details of torture cases on their files. In terms of processing complaints, ever since they had opened those offices, there had been no specific complaints filed against the police.

The delegation said that police were responsible for protecting witnesses, prosecutors and judges and there was a witness protection programme. They were using bilingual agents to ensure there was interpretation for indigenous peoples. There was also a special office for victim care that was responsible for providing psychosocial support.

For detainees, unified criteria were being developed for their treatment, in their transfer, for example. They were also working on the availability of medical assistance and addressing the issue of their communication with the outside.

The prison system was responsible for protecting the human rights of the prisoners. For persons deprived of liberty, a special project, Encuentro con el bien, dealt with rehabilitation, training, education and recreation. Prison staff were also constantly being trained, which would allow prisoners to enjoy their rights, the delegation said.

Until the State of Guatemala has control over all detention centres, the delegation stressed, it could not guarantee the rights of all detainees. Prisons in Guatemala were controlled by the inmate population by means of disciplinary committees, made up of detainees themselves, established to oversee order in the prisons. Those committees had been institutionalized within the prison system for many years now. That situation was one of the principal causes of corruption, abuses and ill-treatment of those incarcerated within the penitentiary system. Those groups were actually used to spread illegal substances and to put pressure on the prison authorities. Regarding the event of 15 August 2005, in which simultaneous riots took place in several prison centres, Guatemala was promoting a law on prison systems, as part of an overall security package, that sought to eliminate corruption in authority and administrative personnel by ensuring that the administration took full control over the prisons.

There were medical facilities being set up for prisons, including nurses' stations. Previously doctors were not available every day. Now doctors had a timetable of 8 hours throughout the week. It was not necessary for a detainee to be ill to request a medical examination, the delegation noted.

Detainees had the support of a specific person who had direct contact with his defence institution, with a view to ensuring that the detainee's rights were ensured, the delegation said.

There had been no complaints of use of excessive force against indigenous peoples by the armed forces, the delegation said.

According to information from various NGOS and the report of the Office of Human Rights Procurator that lynching had become a widespread form of torture in Guatemala, the delegation stated that in Guatemala lynching was not a crime as such. There were thus no statistics on that type of offence.

While the Constitution guaranteed detainees the right to legal representation, it was important to note, the delegation said, that outside of the capital, in other parts of the country detainees had to wait 8 to 15 days before they had access to a lawyer. There was resistance on the part of the police to apply that right.

In Guatemala there were no unified statistics regarding the crime of torture. There had been seven cases in 2003, seven for 2004 and one for 2005, and it was not possible to obtain information on the situation of trials themselves. There had been 28 in 2002, according to the Public Prosecutor's Office.

The situation of minors in prisons in Guatemala has improved over the past few months, owing to the separation of prisoners into three age groups, under the age of 15, 15 to 18 years, and then 18 years and above.

Compensation measures to victims of the events that had taken place during the time of the armed conflict were not currently awarded by domestic courts, the delegation said. The State had, however, provided compensation based upon the judgements issued by international courts.

Questions by Experts

CLAUDIO GROSSMAN, the Committee Expert serving as Rapporteur for the report of Guatemala, said that the purpose of the dialogue was to improve things and to help to accelerate implementation of the peace agreements, as the Ambassador of Guatemala said himself.

The country report called attention to the very important situation in Guatemala, the relationship between the civilian authority and the military authority, and the development of a new policy in that regard.

The Commission for the Investigation of Illegal Bodies and Clandestine Security Structures that was being set up was also very important, but that body had been announced in Guatemala's report to another human rights treaty body in 2003. What was the possibility that that body would be approved soon, particularly in view of the importance of the issue of impunity, Mr. Grossman asked.

Continuing on the issue of impunity, he asked what happened when there were attacks on human rights? The information that the Committee had had from NGOs was that in attacks against human rights defenders it had been possible to identify some of those responsible, Mr. Grossman said.

In the peace agreements, impunity had been denied for grave violations of human rights, including torture, but the Constitutional Court had rejected that stance. With respect to the incident in Peten, the Constitutional Court said that it had to be submitted to the Special Court on Reconciliation. That was back in 2002. Had anything happened since then, Mr. Grossman wondered? Apparently there had been no progress, and that was something that was of fundamental importance with regard to impunity.

Acknowledging the important work that had been undertaken by Guatemala to reform the National Civil Police, and how hard that was to accomplish, Mr. Grossman remained concerned that 3,000 new military forces had been put in to undertake security duties in Guatemala. Why had those resources not been allocated to the police, he wondered? The army should not be dealing with internal security responsibilities. There had to be a proper separation of powers. Experience in Latin America showed that putting the army in charge of cleaning up crime was not a way to get good results.

The Government had a number of individuals on death row, but it had not exercised the death penalty for some time, Mr. Grossman noted. What was the situation of those individuals, he wanted to know. How many of them were there and were they in a situation that violated international law?

ALEXANDER KOVALEV, the Committee Expert serving as Co-Rapporteur for the report of Guatemala, said that the delegation's presentation represented quite clearly the Government's will to address the issues raised by the Committee.

Mr. Kovalev wondered when the planned Consultative Commission on the Penitentiary System would actually be in place.

Noting that under the Children and Adolescents Act of 2003, minors under 18 years of age were not criminally liable, Mr. Kovalev was concerned that minors between the ages of 13 and 18 could still be tried criminally under special procedures.

In addition, why had the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which Guatemala had signed, never been ratified, Mr. Kovalev asked.

Other Committee Experts also raised a series of questions. An Expert asked why so few cases of torture had been brought to trial. Also, what was being done about the crime of lynching, a question on the Committee's list, which had not been answered by the delegation. Other issues raised by Experts included sexual violence against women in police stations; medical examinations for detainees; forced expulsions; firearms control; and the strange fact that 90 per cent of asylum-seekers reportedly stopped the asylum proceedings on their own initiative.

For use of the information media; not an official record

CAT06007E