Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback United Nations Committee Against Torture - Concluding Observations

Cyprus - Concluding Observations on the Fourth Report of Cyprus [2014] UNCATCO 5; CAT/C/CYP/CO/4 (15 June 2014)

	United Nations	CAT/C/CYP/CO/4
	Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment		Distr.: General 16 June 2014 Original: English

Committee against Torture

Concluding observations on the fourth report of Cyprus[*]

1. The Committee against Torture considered the fourth periodic report of Cyprus (CAT/C/CYP/4) at its 1226th and 1229th meetings, held on 8 and 9 May 2014 (see CAT/C/SR.1226 and 1229), and adopted at its 1244th and 1245th meetings, held on 21 May 2014 (see CAT/C/SR.1244 and 1245), the following concluding observations.

A. Introduction

2. The Committee expresses its appreciation to the State party for accepting the optional reporting procedure and for having submitted its fourth periodic report in a timely manner thereunder, as it improves the cooperation between the State party and the Committee and focuses the examination of the report as well as the dialogue with the delegation.

3. The Committee appreciates the open and constructive dialogue with the State party’s high-level multisectoral delegation, as well as the additional information and explanations provided by the delegation to the Committee.

B. Positive aspects

4. The Committee welcomes the ratification by the State party of the following international instruments:

(a) The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography, on 6 April 2006;

(b) The Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, on 29 April 2009;

(c) The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict, on 2 July 2010;

(d) The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, on 27 June 2011.

5. The Committee welcomes the State party’s ongoing efforts to revise its legislation in order to give effect to the Committee’s recommendations and to enhance the implementation of the Convention, including the adoption of:

(a) Law No. 163(I)/2005 on the Rights of Arrested and Detained Persons;

(b) Law No. 60(I)/2014, on Preventing and Combating Trafficking in Human Beings and Exploitation and Protecting its Victims;

(c) Law No. 126(I)/2012 on the Establishment and Regulation of Private Employment Agencies and Related Matters, which is aimed at preventing such agencies from being used for trafficking activities.

6. The Committee also welcomes the following administrative and other measures:

(a) The adoption of the National Action Plan on the Prevention and Handling of Family Violence (2010–2013) in 2009;

(b) The adoption of the National Action Plan against the Trafficking of Human Beings (2013–2015) in 2013 and the abolition of the special visa for artists;

(c) The appointment of the Ombudsperson as a national preventive mechanism, in accordance with Law No. 2(III)/2009 on the Provisions of the Optional Protocol of the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

C. Principal subjects of concern and recommendations

Fundamental legal safeguards

7. While welcoming the enactment of Law No. 163(I)/2005 (para. 5 (a) above), and its application to all persons in detention, including those detained under the immigration legislation, the Committee is concerned that section 23 of the Law does not guarantee the right to be examined routinely and free of charge by an independent doctor from the outset of the deprivation of liberty. The Committee is further concerned that article 30 of the same Law provides for criminal sanctions for detainees who abuse the right to medical examination or treatment, which may have a deterrent effect on the effective exercise of that right. The Committee also takes note of repeated allegations that persons deprived of their liberty were not given information on their rights or were given information that was not in a language they understood, and that individuals were not assigned legal aid prior to their initial interrogations (arts. 2, 11 and 12).

The State party should:

(a) Abolish article 30 of Law No. 163(I)/2005 and ensure that detained persons undergo a routine and free-of-charge medical examination when they arrive at a detention facility, and are afforded access to examination and treatment by independent doctors on request without conditioning such access on the permission of officials. All medical examinations of prisoners should be conducted out of the hearing and, whenever the security situation allows, out of the sight of prison officers;

(b) Establish an effective and expeditious system of free legal aid that guarantees the right to unrestricted access to an ex officio lawyer, including consultations in private, as from the moment of deprivation of liberty and during interrogations;

(c) Ensure that all persons detained are informed orally and in writing of their rights in a language they understand, including information about the legal remedies to challenge the lawfulness of their detention, the rights of persons under the immigration legislation, and the right to have the free assistance of an interpreter;

(d) Ensure that the State party monitors regularly compliance with the legal safeguards by all public officials and that those who do not comply with those safeguards are duly disciplined.

Impunity and prompt, effective and impartial investigations

8. The Committee welcomes the criminalization of torture and ill-treatment in sections 3 and 5, respectively, of Law No. 235/90 on the ratification of the Convention, which fully incorporates the definition of torture as set out in the Convention. However, the Committee observes that section 3 of the Law has never been invoked before, or applied by, domestic courts and section 5 has been invoked in only 4 of the 11 criminal cases of alleged ill-treatment by police officers registered from 2006 to 2010. The Committee also notes with great concern that, during the same period, out of 128 complaints relating to torture and ill-treatment investigated by the Independent Authority for the Investigation of Allegations and Complaints against the Police, only one case ended with a criminal conviction for common assault. The low rate of conviction does not correspond to the documented allegations of ill-treatment by law enforcement officials, particularly against immigrants. The Committee also takes into consideration reports that allege a lack of transparency of the investigations and insufficient protection afforded to complainants, who reportedly have been, on various occasions, accused of bodily harm against the police officers they complained about (arts. 1, 2, 4, 12, 13 and 16).

The State party should strengthen the implementation of the existing legislation and the measures already adopted to change the culture of impunity by, inter alia:

(a) Requiring all officials to report to the Office of the Attorney General cases indicative of ill-treatment, and adopting protective measures to ensure the confidentiality and safety of reporting officers;

(b) Ensuring that the Attorney General is duly informed of all the allegations of torture or ill-treatment received by the Independent Authority for the Investigation of Allegations and Complaints against the Police and carries out prompt, effective and impartial investigations whenever there are reasonable grounds to believe that acts of torture or ill-treatment have been committed, including investigation of those officials who knew, or should have known, that ill-treatment was occurring and failed to prevent it or report it;

(c) Ensuring that the Attorney General entrusts the investigation of reports of torture or ill-treatment by law enforcement officials only to independent criminal investigators;

(d) Ensuring that public officials under investigation of having committed acts of torture or ill-treatment are immediately suspended from their duties and remain so throughout the investigation, subject to the observance of the principle of presumption of innocence;

(e) Guaranteeing that complainants are protected against ill-treatment or intimidation that may arise as a consequence of their complaint, and are duly informed of the progress and results of their complaint;

(f) Duly bringing to trial alleged perpetrators of acts of torture or ill-treatment and, if they are found guilty, punishing them with penalties proportionate to the grave nature of their acts. The Committee draws attention to paragraph 10 of its general comment No. 2 (2007), in which the Committee emphasizes that it would be a violation of the Convention to prosecute conduct solely as ill-treatment where the elements of torture are also present.

Domestic violence

9. The Committee welcomes the legislative and other measures aimed at combating domestic violence, including the extension of the legal protection in this area to migrant workers living with their employers and the adoption of the National Action Plan on the Prevention and Handling of Family Violence (2010–2013) (para. 6 (a) above). However, the Committee notes with concern the low number of investigations and convictions, the majority of which ended in a fine, according to the information provided. Moreover, the insufficient assistance to victims, including the lack of legal aid, is a matter of concern, as is the lack of information regarding the implementation and impact of the successive national action plans. The Committee also notes with concern reports that indicate a reluctance of migrant spouses and migrant live-in workers to report violence against them to the police, since their right to a residence permit is linked to the consent of the very same person they intend to denounce (arts. 2, 12, 13, 14 and 16).

The State party should redouble its efforts to combat domestic violence, inter alia, by:

(a) Ensuring the effective implementation of the legal framework, including its application to live-in domestic workers, by promptly, effectively and impartially investigating all incidents of violence and prosecuting and punishing perpetrators in accordance with the gravity of their acts;

(b) Sensitizing and training law enforcement personnel, social welfare officials, prosecutors and judges on the investigation, prosecution and sanctioning of cases of domestic violence and on creating the appropriate conditions for victims to report such cases to the authorities;

(c) Taking measures to facilitate complaints by victims and informing them about recourses available;

(d) Strengthening the public awareness-raising campaigns to fight domestic violence and gender stereotypes;

(e) Undertaking an impact assessment of the various action plans and the criminal justice responses to counter domestic violence, with a view to increasing their effectiveness, and ensure their application to live-in domestic workers;

(f) Ensuring that victims of domestic violence benefit from effective protection, including the right to a residence permit independent of the abusive spouse or their migration status, and have access to sufficient and adequately funded shelters, medical and legal aid, psychosocial counselling and social support schemes.

Trafficking in persons

10. While welcoming the legislative and other measures to address trafficking in persons (paras. 5 (b) and (c) and 6 (b) above), the Committee is concerned at reports indicating that no offender has ever been convicted for the crime of human trafficking; convictions are handed down, rather, under non-trafficking statutes that impose more lenient sentences. The Committee also regrets the lack of information provided on the measures taken to investigate officials who have participated in this crime. The Committee notes further information indicating that the new Law 60(I)/2014 on trafficking does not provide victims with the right to an effective remedy until they are recognized as victims by the Office of Combating Trafficking in Human Beings of the police, on the basis of its own internal determination procedure. The Committee also takes into consideration deficiencies reported in the provision of social services to victims of trafficking (arts. 2, 12, 13, 14 and 16).

The State party should:

(a) Vigorously enforce the new legislative framework and promptly, thoroughly, effectively and impartially investigate, prosecute, convict and punish trafficking offenders, including officials involved, with appropriate penalties;

(b) Provide specialized training to the police, prosecutors and judges on the application of the new Law 60(I)/2014 and on the effective investigation, prosecution and punishment of acts of trafficking, and to immigration officers and social workers on the identification of victims of trafficking, including victims of torture among the trafficked persons;

(c) Monitor and assess the new visa regime to prevent its potential misuse by traffickers and urgently activate the national referral mechanism;

(d) Undertake an impact assessment of the national plans, with a view to increasing their efficiency;

(e) Provide an effective remedy to all victims of the crime of trafficking, ensuring prompt and adequate psychological support, medical care, access to welfare benefits, adequate shelter and work permits for them, irrespective of their ability to cooperate in the legal proceedings against traffickers.

Identification of victims of torture during the refugee determination process

11. While recognizing that the government medical council that assesses potential victims of torture during the asylum process was reinforced in 2012 with a psychologist, the Committee is concerned about information indicating that the process still does not include as a routine measure a psychological/psychiatric evaluation of victims. The Committee also notes with concern the insufficient interpretation during the medical assessment, which reportedly led to children of torture claimants assuming the role of interpreters, as well as information indicating that none of the medical evaluations determined that torture had been the cause of the findings. The Committee also takes into account information indicating that, to date, there is no procedure in place for the timely identification of victims of torture arriving in the State party (arts. 2, 3 and 16).

The State party should:

(a) Urgently improve the screening system introduced by the Asylum Service to ensure that effective measures are in place to identify as early as possible victims of torture and trafficking, and provide them with immediate rehabilitation and priority access to the asylum determination procedure;

(b) Provide a thorough medical and psychological examination and report, in accordance with the procedures set out in the Manual on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (the Istanbul Protocol), by trained independent health experts, with the support of professional interpreters, when signs of torture or traumatization have been detected during the personal interviews before the Asylum Service;

(c) Provide regular and compulsory training on the procedures established in the Istanbul Protocol to asylum officers and health experts participating in the asylum determination procedure, including on training on detecting psychological traces of torture and on gender-sensitive approaches.

Judicial review with suspensive effect

12. While noting the decision of the State party to establish a new administrative court with competence to look into the merits of appeals filed by rejected asylum seekers, the Committee is concerned that, at present, asylum seekers are not legally protected against refoulement during the judicial review process and that there is no effective judicial remedy with automatic suspensive effect to challenge the deportation of asylum applicants and undocumented immigrants, as indicated by the European Court of Human Rights in its judgement in the case of M.A. v. Cyprus of 23 July 2013 (arts. 2 and 3).

The State party should abide by its commitment to provide for an effective judicial remedy with automatic suspensive effect of the deportation of asylum seekers and other undocumented immigrants, through a court that satisfies the requirements of due process with competence to look into the merits of appeals.

Non-refoulement

13. The Committee is greatly concerned at the low recognition rates of refugee status and subsidiary protection status, as well as by reports alleging that asylum seekers have been deported to their countries of origin despite serious risks of torture or religious persecution, such as persons of the Baha’i faith deported to the Islamic Republic of Iran. Moreover, the Committee observes with concern that the amended section 19, paragraph 7, of the Refugee (Amending) Law No. 2 of 2013 no longer protects from refoulement persons granted subsidiary protection status, including persons granted such status on account of a real risk of being subjected to torture (arts. 2 and 3).

The State party should amend section 19, paragraph 7, of the Refugee (Amending) Law No. 2 to ensure that beneficiaries of subsidiary protection are protected from unwarranted refoulement. The State party should also ensure that the asylum claims are thoroughly and individually examined and allow sufficient time for asylum seekers to fully indicate the reasons for their application and obtain and present crucial evidence. Beneficiaries of subsidiary protection should be able to have their cases re-examined before the subsidiary protection ceases.

Legal aid for asylum seekers and undocumented immigrants

14. The Committee is concerned that asylum seekers do not have access to legal aid at the first instance administrative level of the asylum process. The Committee also notes with concern that asylum seekers and undocumented immigrants, including unaccompanied minors, can have access to legal aid to challenge their deportation and detention orders only if they are able to argue before a legal aid judge of the Supreme Court that they have good chances of success because of “blatant illegality” or “irreparable damage”. The Committee considers that the criteria for legal aid are overly restrictive for asylum seekers and undocumented immigrants and place them at risk of unwarranted refoulement and illegal detention (arts. 2 and 3).

The State party should amend the Refugee Law and the Law on Provision of Legal Aid in order to guarantee access to independent, qualified and free-of-charge legal assistance for asylum seekers during the entire asylum procedure, at first instance level and during the judicial review, as well as for undocumented immigrants, including unaccompanied minors, in addition to the appointment of a guardian, in order to challenge the lawfulness and duration of their deportation and detention orders.

Detention conditions

15. The Committee appreciates the remarkable reduction of overcrowding in the prison system, from an overpopulation of 204 per cent in 2012 to 114 per cent in April 2014. Moreover, the Committee commends the undertaking of the President of the Republic to reform effectively the prison system and replace the overcontrolling approach with a human-rights-based approach. The Committee remains concerned, however, at the high number of deaths in custody, especially suicides, as well as the incidents of inter-prisoner violence, including gang rape, with the connivance of prison guards. The Committee is further concerned by information about obstacles that impede Turkish Cypriot prisoners detained in the southern part of the island receiving visits from family and friends. As acknowledged by the State party, the Prison Law and Regulations still permit the imposition, as a disciplinary punishment, of confinement to special isolation cells for up to 60 days or confinement to a personal cell for up to 90 days. Moreover, the Committee takes into account reports that allege the use of cellular confinement as an informal punishment without procedure, as well as on the imposition of provisional disciplinary confinement for several days after an alleged commission of a disciplinary offence (arts. 2, 11 and 16).

The State party should continue its efforts to bring the conditions of detention in places of deprivation of liberty into line with the appropriate provisions of the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, which are currently under revision, in particular by:

(a) Implementing effectively the measures designed to reduce overcrowding to a minimum, particularly through the wider application of non-custodial measures as an alternative to imprisonment, in the light of the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Non-custodial Measures (the Tokyo Rules);

(b) Ensuring: (i) that all incidents of death, suicide, attempted suicide and violence in custody are reported to central authorities for monitoring purposes; (ii) that all cases are effectively and independently investigated and, on a finding of criminal responsibility, lead to a penalty proportional to the gravity of the offence; (iii) enhanced monitoring and detection of at-risk detainees, adopting preventive measures regarding the risk of suicide and inter-prisoner violence, including procedures for management of the cases and increasing the number of prison staff; and (iv) continuous evaluation of the impact of the current measures to prevent suicide and inter-prisoner violence, with a view to increasing their efficiency;

(c) Revising the Prison Law and Regulations in order to ensure that solitary confinement: (i) is never applied to juveniles in conflict with the law or to persons with psychosocial disabilities and (ii) remains a measure of last resort, imposed for as short a time as possible, under strict supervision and judicial review. The State party should establish clear and specific criteria for decisions on isolation and ensure that detainees maintain social contact while in solitary confinement. The practice of imposing informal disciplinary isolation should be strictly prohibited;

(d) Giving all reasonable facilities to all detainees for receiving visits from their family and friends, in accordance with international standards.

Detention of asylum seekers

16. The Committee is concerned that, although the Refugee Law permits the detention of asylum seekers only in exceptional cases and for a maximum of 32 days, in the majority of cases asylum seekers are detained under the Aliens and Immigration Law as undocumented immigrants, or for minor offences, and remain detained for protracted periods of time during the whole status determination procedure. The Committee notes further that asylum seekers are also detained when their asylum claims are refused at the administrative level but are pending judicial review. That situation prompted various hunger strikes by Syrian refugees in 2013 and incidents of suicide in protest against their detention (arts. 11 and 16).

The Committee urges the State party to ensure that persons in need of international protection, including those fleeing indiscriminate violence, are not detained or, if at all, only as a measure of last resort, after alternatives to detention have been duly examined and exhausted and for as short a period as possible. The State party should also refrain from applying the Aliens and Immigration Law to asylum seekers.

Detention of undocumented immigrants

17. Noting that the Aliens and Immigration Law permits the administrative detention of undocumented immigrants in exceptional cases and when other less coercive measures are not considered adequate, in accordance with the European Union return directive (directive 2008/115/EG), the Committee is concerned that the Aliens and Immigration Law does not list any alternatives to detention and that undocumented immigrants are routinely detained, without a consideration of less coercive measures or the person’s risk of absconding. The Committee is further concerned by reports indicating that immigrants are being detained repeatedly by the police, owing to the absence of a valid residence permit, for periods that exceed the 18-month maximum legal period, even when the State party cannot carry out the deportation within a reasonable time. The Committee supports the view of the European Court of Human Rights in M.A. v. Cyprus that the current recourse before the Supreme Court under article 146 of the Constitution to challenge the lawfulness of a detention order, which is of an average of eight months at first instance, is too long to guarantee a prompt judicial review of the detention (arts. 11 and 16).

The State party should:

(a) Repeal the legal provisions that criminalize irregular entry and/or stay, and list in the legislation alternative measures to administrative detention, such as reporting requirements or sureties;

(b) Establish and apply guidelines to examine the necessity and proportionality of the detention and prohibit detention when there are no prospects for the immigrant of being removed within a reasonable time;

(c) Apply detention only as a last resort, after alternative measures to administrative detention have been duly examined and exhausted, when necessary and proportionate and for as short a period as possible, which should never exceed the absolute time limit for the administrative detention of undocumented immigrants, including in cases of repeated detention;

(d) Ensure that the release letter provides for a temporary residence permit for immigrants pending the regularization of their status, so that they do not enter the detention cycle;

(e) Ensure prompt and regular review by a court of the detention of undocumented migrants.

Ill-treatment and conditions of detention at the Menoyia detention centre

18. While welcoming the appointment of a complaints committee in May 2013 to handle complaints regarding ill-treatment and detention conditions in the Menoyia detention centre, as well as the decision to refrain from using handcuffs, the Committee remains concerned by the numerous allegations of ill-treatment by police in the centre, which has led to protests and hunger strikes. The Committee also received information regarding very limited outdoor access, poor quality of food and frequent resort to solitary confinement (arts. 11 and 16).

The Committee urges the State party to ensure that the legal regime at Menoyia detention centre is suitable for its purpose and that it differs from the regime of penal detention. The complaints committee should vigilantly pursue each complaint and immediately transmit allegations of ill-treatment to the Office of the AttorneyGeneral for further investigation. Solitary confinement should remain a measure of last resort, imposed for as short a time as possible, under strict supervision and judicial review.

Detention of unaccompanied children and families

19. While acknowledging the efforts of the State party, through a ministerial decision communicated on 5 May 2014, to limit detention for the purpose of the deportation of unaccompanied children and families with children, the Committee notes with concern that such detention is still permitted if a mother with minor children “refuses to cooperate” or during the age verification process for an unaccompanied minor. In both cases, the families or minors will be detained “in suitable establishments that will be created in due time with [European Union] Solidarity Funds”. The Committee also notes with concern that children over the age of 8 can be forcibly separated from their parents and placed under the care of the Director of the Social Welfare Services (arts. 11 and 16).

The State party should ensure that unaccompanied children and families with children are not detained except as a measure of last resort and, in the latter case, after alternatives to detention have been duly examined and exhausted and in the best interest of the child, and for as short a period as possible. The right of children not to be forcibly separated from their parents should be respected, no matter what the age of the child. The State party in such instances should refrain from detaining unaccompanied children and families with children if there are no suitable places to host them.

Training

20. While taking note of the various training programmes for police forces and the future training to be developed for prison staff, the Committee notes that the State party has not provided information on regular training on the provisions of the Convention for all officials involved in the treatment and custody of persons deprived of their liberty. The Committee is also concerned that the guidelines set out in the Istanbul Protocol have not been fully incorporated in investigations into cases of torture or ill-treatment (art. 10).

The State party should:

(a) Develop modules on the provisions of the Convention in the periodic and compulsory training programmes for all law enforcement officials, judges, prosecutors, prison and immigration officers and others;

(b) Provide regular training on the Istanbul Protocol to forensic doctors, medical personnel and other officials involved in dealing with detainees and asylum seekers in the investigation and documentation of cases of torture;

(c) Develop and apply a methodology for evaluating the effectiveness of educational and training programmes relating to the Convention and the Istanbul Protocol.

Missing persons

21. The Committee welcomes the work of the bi-communal Committee on Missing Persons in Cyprus (CMP), which had identified, as at 22 November 2013, a total of 359 Greek Cypriots, out of the 1,493 officially reported missing, and 97 Turkish Cypriots, out of the 502 officially reported missing as a result of the inter-communal fighting (1963–1964) and of the events of July 1974 and afterwards. The Committee also notes that the mandate of the bi-communal CMP is limited to looking into cases of Cypriots reported missing, “without attempting to attribute responsibility for the deaths of any missing persons or make findings as to the cause of such deaths”. The bi-communal CMP is also not empowered to grant redress to the relatives of the missing persons. While welcoming the fact that the Attorney General has opened some criminal investigations as a result of the successful identification by CMP of the remains, some relatives of missing persons have not been given the opportunity to challenge the acts or omissions of the investigating authorities in court (arts. 2 and 14).

The State party should redouble its efforts to guarantee that the relatives of missing persons identified by CMP receive appropriate redress, including the means for their psychological rehabilitation, compensation, satisfaction and for the implementation of the right to truth. As stated in paragraph 17 of the Committee’s general comment No. 3 (2012) on article 14 of the Convention, a State’s failure to investigate, criminally prosecute, or to allow civil proceedings related to allegations of acts of torture in a prompt manner, may constitute a de facto denial of redress and thus constitute a violation of the State’s obligations under article 14. Additionally, the Committee recalls that judicial remedies must always be available to victims, as should all evidence concerning acts of torture or ill-treatment upon the request of victims, their legal counsel, or a judge (general comment No. 3, para. 30).

Redress, including compensation and rehabilitation

22. The Committee takes note of the information mentioned in the State report (CAT/C/CYP/4, para. 123) that only two cases concerning torture and ill-treatment were upheld by the Supreme Court, and regrets the lack of information on redress and compensation measures awarded by the courts of the State party to the two victims of those cases (art. 14).

The Committee draws the attention of the State party to general comment No. 3 (2012), in which the Committee explains the content and scope of the obligation of States parties to provide full redress to victims of torture. The State party should:

(a) Review the existing procedures for seeking reparation in order to ensure that they are accessible to all victims of torture and ill-treatment;

(b) Ensure full compliance with article 14 of the Convention, as interpreted in general comment No. 3 (2012), and provide the Committee with information on redress and compensation ordered by courts and ongoing rehabilitation, including resources allocated for that purpose.

Data collection

23. The Committee regrets the absence of comprehensive and disaggregated data on complaints of, investigations into, and prosecutions and convictions for torture and ill-treatment by law-enforcement, security, military and prison personnel, at the criminal and disciplinary levels, as well as on deaths in custody, crimes involving trafficking, and domestic and sexual violence.

The State party should compile statistical data relevant to the monitoring of the implementation of the Convention at the national level, including data, at the criminal and disciplinary levels, on complaints of, investigations into and prosecutions and convictions for torture and ill-treatment, deaths in custody, trafficking and domestic and sexual violence, as well as on the means of redress, including compensation and rehabilitation, provided to the victims.

Other issues

24. The Committee invites the State party to ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families.

25. The State party is requested to disseminate widely the report submitted to the Committee and the Committee’s concluding observations, in all appropriate languages, through official websites, the media and non-governmental organizations.

26. The Committee requests the State party to provide, by 23 May 2015, follow-up information in response to the Committee’s recommendations relating to strengthening legal safeguards for persons detained, as contained in paragraph 7 (d) of the present concluding observations. In addition, the Committee requests information on follow-up to the recommendations contained in paragraphs 11 (a) 17 (c) and 19 of the present document.

27. The State party is invited to submit its next report, which will be the fifth periodic report, by 23 May 2018. For that purpose, the Committee will, in due course, submit to the State party a list of issues prior to reporting, considering that the State party has accepted to report to the Committee under the optional reporting procedure.

[*] Adopted by the Committee at its fifty-second session (28 April–23 May 2014).