COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE OPENS ITS SIXTY-FIFTH SESSION

The Committee against Torture this morning opened its sixty-fifth session, hearing a statement by Antti Korkeakivi, Chief of the Anti-Torture, Coordination and Funds Section at the Human Rights Treaties Branch of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and Representative of the Secretary-General. The Committee also adopted its agenda and programme of work for the session.

Mr. Korkeakivi conveyed the greetings of the new High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet. He said that in the High Commissioner’s statement to the First Ministerial Meeting of the Alliance for Torture-Free Trade, held on 24 September 2018 in New York, she had referred to the fact that her country and family had suffered from the devastating effects of torture. She reminded States that they did not only have a legal obligation to prohibit and refrain from torture, but that under the Convention against Torture they also had to take effective steps to prevent it. No State and no company should export torture; no State should permit the sale of equipment whose use would be illegal in their own country and no State should turn a blind eye to the final use of products made on its territory. With her personal and professional exposure to the effects of torture, the High Commissioner fully appreciated the importance of the crucial work carried out by the United Nations anti-torture mechanisms, namely the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture, the Special Rapporteur on Torture, the Voluntary Fund for the Victims of Torture, and the Committee against Torture.

Mr. Korkeakivi said that the High Commissioner, since taking up her office, had stressed her fundamental attachment to the courage, dignity and selflessness of all defenders and activists for human rights. The crucial role played by human rights defenders was also highlighted in the recent report of the Secretary-General on cooperation with the United Nations, its representatives and mechanisms in the field of human rights, containing detailed information on intimidation and reprisals faced by those cooperating with the United Nations in the field of human rights. On 19 September 2018, the Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights had held its first-ever interactive dialogue on the report at the Human Rights Council. He had stressed that, while cases of reprisals against human rights defenders presented in the report had only been the tip of the iceberg, the report had demonstrated the magnitude and scope of reprisals. He had emphasized three particularly disturbing trends: reprisals being invoked in the context of counter-terrorism, with human rights defenders being labelled as “terrorists”; reprisals often disguised in legal, political and administrative obstacles; and the use of accreditation and security procedures to hinder people from speaking out at United Nations headquarters and elsewhere. The Assistant Secretary-General had explained his intention to do more to engage with United Nations partners to explore how to address the issue of reprisals more effectively as a system. The contribution of the Committee against Torture would be essential since it had played a leading role in that area within the treaty body system. It had had a focal point on reprisals since 2012 and it had adopted guidelines on the receipt and handling of allegations of reprisals. In that context, the Committee’s participation in the workshop on reprisals co-organized by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the International Service for Human Rights on 12 and 13 December in Geneva was highly appreciated.

Turning to the Secretary-General’s report on the status of the treaty body system, Mr. Korkeakivi reminded that it highlighted that the adjustments to the meeting time allocated to committees had not been matched by the allocation of sufficient staff resources corresponding to the workload of treaty bodies. The gap between the growing workload and staff resources was particularly wide in respect of individual communications. The report also stressed that other mandated activities of treaty bodies were far more labour intensive than what had originally been anticipated. Therefore, the staff of the Office had difficulty of keeping up with the workload and completing the required tasks. Mr. Korkeakivi added that the Office looked forward to addressing those immediate challenges with the Committee and to exploring sustainable, longer-term options, including in connection with the 2020 review and beyond. He welcomed the Committee’s active engagement and extensive discussions to formulate the Committee’s contribution to the 2020 review as a follow-up to the last meeting of the treaty body chairs. The chairs had also agreed to explore further alignment of the simplified reporting procedure across treaty bodies. To facilitate that process, the Office and the Geneva Academy were organizing a workshop on that topic on 10 and 11 December 2018 in Geneva. The chairs had also endorsed elements for a common aligned procedure for follow-up to concluding observations, decisions and views.

Finally, Mr. Korkeakivi informed the Committee about recent organizational steps that the Office had taken to advance coordinated and focused anti-torture work within the Human Rights Treaties Branch. The Office had brought together the secretaries of the Committee against Torture, the Subcommittee on the Prevention of Torture, and the United Nations Voluntary Fund for the Victims of Torture in a new Anti-Torture, Coordination and Funds Section, which also dealt with treaty body strengthening and it supported chairpersons’ meetings. The change would not affect the composition of the Committee’s secretariat. Mr. Korkeakivi added that he was confident that the clustering of anti-torture teams would help raise the profile of the Committee’s work and facilitate its cooperation with the Subcommittee and the Fund.

Committee Chairperson Jens Modvig noted that originally the Alliance for Torture-Free Trade was a European Union initiative, but it was called the Alliance for Torture-Free Trade and the death penalty. He asked if that was still the case, because one might fear that joining these two rather different aspects could tear away support from some countries.

Committee Experts also inquired about the plans to boost the efforts by the chairpersons of the United Nations treaty bodies to protect victims of reprisals against those who cooperated with the United Nations human rights bodies, and about staffing and support for the Committee against Torture.

Mr. Korkeakivi said that the High Commissioner for Human Rights attached great importance to the Alliance for Torture-Free Trade, although there were no plans for a new instrument at the moment. He added that the Alliance also covered the death penalty. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights would look to the Committee’s opinion about the initiative.

As for reprisals, Mr. Korkeakivi explained that the Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights would look at the work of focal points on reprisals within each committee. He assured the Experts that their Committee would receive bolstered support from the Office, given that there were three anti-torture teams, and that resources would not be given to someone else.

The Committee then adopted the agenda and programme of work for the sixty-fifth session. During the session from 12 November to 7 December, the Committee will review reports presented by Peru, Viet Nam, Guatemala, Netherlands, Canada, and Maldives. All the documents relating to the Committee’s work, including reports submitted by States parties, can be found on the session’s webpage.

The webcast of the Committee’s public meetings will be available via the following link: http://webtv.un.org/meetings-events/.


The Committee will next meet in public on Tuesday, 13 November, at 10 a.m. to consider the report of Peru (CAT/C/PER/7).


For use of the information media; not an official record

CAT/18/018E