The Committee against Torture held its annual meeting with States Parties on 28 April 2009 in Geneva, with nearly forty States taking part in the dialogue. The issue of the Committee’s transparency dominated the discussion, with certain States questioning the election of country rapporteurs and challenging the role of NGOs in the reporting process. Egypt was first to ask about the criteria used to appoint country rapporteurs for each State review, showing persistent interest in the identity of the rapporteur chosen for the upcoming review of Israel. China agreed with Egypt that there should be a transparent procedure for selecting country rapporteurs, and further stressed that if the Committee was to be efficient and transparent it would have to address the problem of using reports from NGOs which allegedly ‘distort facts and spread lies to pursue a hidden political agenda’. In this respect it wanted to know more about the process by which the Committee assessed the validity of NGO reports ‘in order to be convinced of CAT’s independence’.
China also reminded the Committee that as an elected body it had an
obligation to remain transparent and impartial, and to seek input from
States Parties. It called upon the Committee to include in its
concluding observations the process by which it reaches its decisions,
noting any dissenting views of Committee members. China said that this
would help to improve its work and avoid some of the ‘improper’
practices of the past. Algeria echoed these sentiments, referring to
the case of an individual who presented information to the Committee
while having an international arrest warrant issued against him for
terrorist attacks committed in Algeria.
Denmark and the United States stressed that they attach great
importance to the independence of the Committee, and furthermore
expressed their belief that the independent experts are free from any
political influence. Denmark underlined its full support for how the
Committee assessed and dealt with NGO information. It also addressed
the Committee’s request for additional meeting time in light of the
backlog of reviews and asked how the Committee will convince States
Parties to support this.
In response to the issues raised, the Committee reiterated its
independence, emphasising that it was created by the States Parties as
a body of independent experts to exercise a semi-judicial role in
applying the Convention, and to act independently in doing so. The Committee's Chairperson Mr.
Grossman explained that discussions within the Committee should and
would remain private, so as to allow for effective debate and to
develop concluding observations through a consensus approach.
On the issue of the appointment of country rapporteurs, the Committee
stated that the election is the result of a process of consensus and a
decision by the Committee as a whole. Criteria that were taken into
account when electing a rapporteur were, among others, the language of
the country that was being reviewed, whether the rapporteur has had
previous experience with the country, conflict of interest between a
State and a rapporteur (e.g. because of nationality), and avoiding
overburdening Committee members.
On the issue of NGO participation and submission of information, the
Committee noted that the Convention provides for the right to everyone
to send information. Even if a terrorist had been tortured and sent
information to the Committee, the Committee had to review this. It
repeatedly affirmed that the information received is processed by a
body of independent experts with considerable experience of assessing
its credibility. The Committee noted that all sources are published and
that the standard practice is to acknowledge where sources have been
used to obtain information.
The Chairperson concluded by saying that in the recent past, criticism
about torture was seen as a violation of a country’s sovereignty. Now,
however, States parties have created a system where this is not
possible anymore.
|
