E Economic and Social Council - acnudh

More documents

Recommendations

Info

E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 70 course of its enquiries, the Bureau has instructed inspectors with the approval of the Ministry of Interior for 38 applications requiring special expertise. Furthermore, discipline reports issued with respect to 10 incidents were conveyed to the Discipline Boards for action. The allegations in relation to 28 incidents were found to be unsubstantiated. A specialized branch called the Gendarmerie Human Rights Violations Investigation and Evaluation Centre was founded on 26 April 2003 to investigate and evaluate allegations of human rights against the Gendarmerie. The Centre investigates allegations, and if necessary initiates administrative or judicial investigations. The result of the action taken by the Centre is submitted to the complainants. In addition, reports on the overall activities of the Centre and statistical information are publicized. Since its creation, the Centre has received 120 applications regarding allegations of torture and illtreatment. As a result, 17 applications were referred to the judicial authorities, 22 applications were found to be already under judicial investigation and disciplinary measures were imposed on 2 officers. Of the 120 applications, 79 were found to be inadmissible. 326. Recommendation (j) stated: The practice of blindfolding detainees in police custody should be absolutely forbidden. 327. According to information from NGOs sources, there has been a noticeable reduction in the blindfolding of detainees in police custody. However, blindfolding is still used during interrogation. This method prevents victims of torture and ill-treatment during interrogation from identifying the perpetrators. 328. The Government informed that the practice of blindfolding detainees in police custody is forbidden. Article 135(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code and Article 23 of the Regulation on Apprehension, Custody and Taking of Statements (RACT) set out prohibited interrogation techniques. 329. Recommendation (k) stated: Given the manifestly pervasive practice of torture, at least up to 1996, there should be a review by an independent body of undisputed integrity of all cases in which the primary evidence against convicted persons is a confession allegedly made under torture. All police officials, including the most senior, found to have been involved in the practice, either directly or by acquiescence, should be forthwith removed from police service and prosecuted; the same should apply to prosecutors and judges implicated in colluding in or ignoring evidence of the practice; the victims should receive substantial compensation. 330. According to information from NGOs, in domestic law, there is a prohibition on relying on confessions obtained by torture as evidence. However, this issue is still problematic in practice. According to the information received, confessions that may have been obtained by torture or ill-treatment are frequently relied upon as evidence. Senior police officers continue to avoid prosecution for being involved in, or acquiescing to, torture or ill-treatment. Furthermore, there is no mechanism for prosecuting judges and prosecutors who collude in, or ignore evidence of torture and ill-treatment. It is possible to bring disciplinary measures against them by filing a complaint to the Supreme Council of Judges and Prosecutors. 331. Recommendation (l) stated: A system permitting an independent body, consisting of respected members of the community, representatives of legal and medical professional
E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 71 organizations and persons nominated by human rights organizations, to visit and report publicly on any place of deprivation of liberty should be set up as soon as possible. 332. According to information from NGOs, Human Rights Councils have been established in provinces and towns in Turkey. However, they are not independent and they do not possess the necessary expertise to effectively investigate issues of torture and ill-treatment in places of detention. 333. The Government informed that Law No. 4681 was adopted by the Parliament on 14 June 2001. It established prison monitoring boards in areas where there is a prison or other place of detention. The boards are composed of five members, appointed by a judicial commission. Membership is on a voluntary basis and no salary is received. The members of the boards are independent and graduates in law, medicine, pharmacology, public administration, sociology, psychology, social services, pedagogical science or similar education programmes. The members should have 10 years professional experience and a reputation for honesty and impartiality. Members of NGOs are able to become members of the boards in their personal capacity. The boards can carry out inspections at penal institutions at any time they wish. However, they are required to visit every institution in their district at least once every two months. They are allowed to hold private meetings with prisoners, interview staff and examine records and documents. They prepare quarterly reports which are forwarded to all relevant actors. Upon receipt of the report, the General Directorate of Prisons and Detention Facilities at the Ministry of Justice take steps to rectify any problems referred to in the reports. 334. Recommendation (m) stated: The Government should give serious consideration to inviting the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to establish a presence in the country capable of implementing a thorough system of visits to all places of detention meeting all the standards established by the ICRC for such visits. 335. The Government reported that a temporary ICRC mission was established in Turkey in April 2003, following the crisis in Iraq. There is currently one international staff member and five local staff members at the mission. The Government reiterated that the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture monitored places of detention in Turkey. 336. Recommendation (n) stated: In view of the numerous complaints concerning detainees' lack of access to counsel, of the failure of prosecutors and judges to investigate meaningfully serious allegations of human rights violations and of the procedural anomalies that are alleged to exist in the State Security Courts, as well as questions relating to their composition, the Government should give serious consideration to extending an invitation to the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers. 337. The Government reported that Turkey has extended a standing invitation to the special procedures of the Human Rights Commission. In principle, any Special Rapporteur is welcome to visit Turkey. However, the Government stated that the grounds leading to the recommendation of extending an invitation to the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers was no longer valid as the State Security Courts have been abolished, the right to access to counsel is ensured and there are effective measures in place for the punishment of perpetrators.
Page 1 and 2:
UNITED NATIONS GE.06-11912 Economic
Page 3 and 4:
Introduction E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 pa
Page 5 and 6:
E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 5 14. Reco
Page 7 and 8:
E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 7 26. Reco
Page 9 and 10:
E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 9 Datafolh
Page 11 and 12:
E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 11 2005, 2
Page 13 and 14:
E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 13 soit de
Page 15 and 16:
Moutombi à l'Etat Major du Groupem
Page 17 and 18:
E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 17 11/04/0
Page 19 and 20: violence sur un détenu » E/CN.4/2
Page 21 and 22: Le Tribunal de première instance d
Page 23 and 24: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 23 indépe
Page 25 and 26: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 25 90. Rec
Page 27 and 28: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 27 102. Se
Page 29 and 30: Déc 3087 1948 16 - - - E/CN.4/2006
Page 31 and 32: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 31 saisi p
Page 33 and 34: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 33 modifiq
Page 35 and 36: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 35 147. La
Page 37 and 38: Mexico E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 37
Page 39 and 40: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 39 173. La
Page 41 and 42: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 41 189. Se
Page 43 and 44: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 43 -Los cu
Page 45 and 46: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 45 accused
Page 47 and 48: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 47 l'Admin
Page 49 and 50: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 49 232. Re
Page 51 and 52: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 51 légale
Page 53 and 54: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 53 transfe
Page 55 and 56: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 55 ‘meas
Page 57 and 58: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 57 places
Page 59 and 60: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 59 pressur
Page 61 and 62: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 61 to prev
Page 63 and 64: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 63 los pre
Page 67 and 68: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 67 equival
Page 69: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 69 319. Th
Page 73 and 74: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 73 courts,
Page 77 and 78: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 77 detenti
Page 81 and 82: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 81 and leg
Page 83 and 84: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 83 Protoco
Page 85 and 86: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 85 420. El
Page 87 and 88: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 87 interme
Page 89 and 90: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 89 de las
Page 91 and 92: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 91 los der
Page 93: E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.2 page 93 Country
show all

E Economic and Social Council - acnudh

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?