United nations

A/HRC/22/53/Add.4 General Assembly
English/French/Spanish only Human Rights Council
Twenty-second session
Agenda item 3
Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil,
political, economic, social and cultural rights,
including the right to development
Report of the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment,
Juan E. Méndez
Addendum
Observations on communications transmitted to Governments and
replies received*
* The present document is being circulated in the languages of submission only. Paragraphs Abbreviations . I. Introduction . II. Observations by the Special Rapporteur . Central African Republic . Democratic People‟s Republic of Korea . Democratic Republic of the Congo . Iran (Islamic Republic of) . Lao Peoples‟s Democratic Republic . Occupied Palestinian Territories . Papua New Guinea . Republic of Korea . Republic of Moldova . Russian Federation . Syrian Arab Republic . United Arab Emirates . United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland . United States of America . Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) . III. Replies received after the observation to communications report A/HRC/19/61/Add 4 of 29 February 2012 . Iran (Islamic Republic of) . United States of America . AL Letter of allegation JAL Joint letter of allegation JUA Joint urgent appeal UA Urgent appeal I. Introduction
The present document is submitted by the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Juan E. Méndez, to the Human Rights Council, pursuant to its resolution 16/23. 2. In the present addendum, the Special Rapporteur provides observations, where considered appropriate, on communications sent to States between 1 December 2011 and 30 November 2012 , as well as on responses received from States in relation to these communications until 31 January 2013. Communications sent and responses received during the reporting period are accessible electronically through hyperlinks. 3. The Special Rapporteur acknowledges the receipt of additional responses from States through to 31 January 2013 in relation to the joint study on global practices in relation to secret detention in the context of countering terrorism (A/HRC/13/42). The current report does not comment on the substance of responses received so far to the joint study on secret detention. Subject to agreement with the other mandate-holders responsible for that joint report, and after more responses are received, a special report on those contributions will be issued. 4. The Special Rapporteur is grateful to all States which have transmitted responses to communications sent. He considers response to his communications an important part of cooperation by States with his mandate. In this context, the Special Rapporteur recalls paragraph 6(a) of the Human Rights Council resolution 16/23 which urges States to "cooperate with and assist the Special Rapporteur in the performance of his or her task, to supply all necessary information requested by him or her and to fully and expeditiously respond to his or her urgent appeals, and urges those Governments that have not yet responded to communications transmitted to them by the Special Rapporteur to answer without further delay." 5. The communications and the relevant replies can be accessed via the communications reports of Special Procedures A/HRC/20/30 (communications sent, 1 December 2011 to 15 March 2012; replies received, 1 February 2012 to 15 May 2012); A/HRC/21/49 (communications sent, 16 March to 31 May 2012; replies received, 16 May to 31 July 2012) and A/HRC/22/67 (communications sent, 1 June to 30 November 2012; replies received, 1 August 2012 to 31 January 2013). Observations by the Special Rapporteur
JAL 21/12/2011 Case No. AGO 3/2011 State reply: None to date Alleged excessive use of
force by authorities during peaceful protests
The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Angola has not responded to this communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council. The communication referred to the alleged excessive use of force against peaceful protestors. The Special Rapporteur reiterates that principle 4 of the UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Officials, provides that, "Law enforcement officials, in carrying out their duty, shall, as far as possible, apply non-violent means before resorting to the use of force and firearms." In light of the fact that no evidence has been provided to the contrary, the Special Rapporteur finds that the rights under the UN Convention against Torture of the individuals mentioned in the communication have been violated. The Special Rapporteur calls on the Government to investigate, prosecute and punish those responsible and to provide full redress to the Argentina
AL 11/07/2012 Case No. ARG 1/2012 State reply: 05/09/2012 Allegacion de actos de
tortura cometidos por agentes oficiales de la localidad de Florencia en la Provincia de
Santa Fe
El Relator lamenta que, hasta la fecha, el Gobierno de Argentina no haya respondido a esta comunicación de fecha 11 de julio de 2012. La comunicación se refería a las alegaciones de actos de tortura cometidos por agentes oficiales en contra de personas detenidas. Los actos alegados incluyen el uso de picana eléctrica sobre varias partes del cuerpo, y el uso de bolsas sobre la cabeza para asfixiar a la persona. Además, se alega que este caso ejemplifica una práctica reiterada por algunos funcionarios policiales en la localidad de Florencia en la Provincia de Santa Fe. En este contexto, el Relator Especial desea hacer referencia al Gobierno de Argentina al párrafo l de la Resolución del Consejo de Derechos Humanos 16/23, la cual "Condena todas las formas de tortura y otros tratos o penas crueles, inhumanos o degradantes, que están y seguirán estando prohibidos en todo momento y en todo lugar y que, por lo tanto, pueden justificarse nunca, y exhorta a todos los gobiernos a que respeten plenamente la prohibición de la tortura y otros tratos o penas crueles, inhumanos o degradantes.‟ También hace referencia al artículo 15 de la Convención contra la Tortura, la cual señala que "[t]odo Estado Parte se asegurará de que ninguna declaración que se demuestre que ha sido hecha como resultado de tortura pueda ser invocada como prueba en ningún procedimiento, salvo en contra de una persona acusada de tortura como prueba de que se ha formulado la declaración." Ante la ausencia de evidencia contradictoria, el Relator Especial considera que los derechos de las presuntas víctimas han sido vulnerados. El Relator Especial exhorta al Gobierno a asegurar la investigación, procesamiento y eventual condena de los responsables, e insta al Gobierno a que proporcione información detallada acerca de las medidas que hayan sido tomadas. Azerbaijan
JUA 22/03/2012 Case No. AZE 2/2012 State reply: 08/05/2012 Alleged acts of ill-
treatment and violence against peaceful protesters in the context of peaceful
demonstrations held in the centre and the proximities of the city of Baku
The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of the Republic of Azerbaijan has not responded to this communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council. The communication referred to the alleged attack on three journalists --which included torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment by guards of the State Oil Company of the Azerbaijan Republic (SOCAR). One of the journalists, Mr. Idrak Abbasov, was the subject of a prior communication sent to the Republic of Azerbaijan on October 17, 2005 by the Special Rapporteur, which also had gone unanswered by the Republic of Azerbaijan. The Special Rapporteur reiterates that paragraph 1 of the Human Rights Council Resolution 16/23 "[c]ondemns all forms of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." In addition, the Special Rapporteur also reminds the Government that "each State has a prime responsibility and duty to protect, promote and implement all human rights and fundamental freedoms […]." In light of the fact that no evidence has been provided to the contrary, the Special Rapporteur finds that the rights of Mr. Idrak Abbasov, Ms. Gunay Musayeva, and Mr. Adalat Abbasov have been violated under the UN Convention against Torture. The Special Abdulsalam under international standards prohibiting torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment have been violated. The Special Rapporteur calls on the Government to investigate, prosecute and punish all allegations of ill-treatment and to end the practice of incommunicado detention. Kazakhstan
JUA 12/10/2012 Case No. KAZ 6/2012 State reply: None to date Alleged arrest and risk
of extradition of Uzbec citizen facing religious persecution in Uzbekistan
The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Kazakhstan has not responded to this communication dated 12 October 2012, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate established by the Human Rights Council. The communication referred to the alleged imminent extradition of Mr. Makhset Abdullayevich Djabbarbergenov to Uzbekistan by Kazakh authorities. The Special Rapporteur expresses concern over allegations that Mr. Djabbarbergenov, a practicing Protestant Christian, may face serious charges for exercising his freedom of religion and a risk of torture upon extradition to Uzbekistan. The Special Rapporteur stresses the Government‟s obligation to protect the right to physical and mental integrity of all persons, set forth inter alia in the UDHR, the ICCPR and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT). In this context, the Special Rapporteur reiterates that article 3 of the Convention against Torture holds that no State party shall expel, return ("refouler"), or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that the person would be in danger of being subjected to torture. The Special Rapporteur also draws the attention of the Government to paragraph 9 of General Commend No. 20 of the Human Rights Committee states that State parties must not expose individuals to the danger of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment upon return to another country by way of extradition, expulsion or refoulement. The Special Rapporteur additionally reminds the Government of paragraph 7d of Human Rights Council Resolution 16/23, which urges States not to expel, return, or extradite or in any other way transfer a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that ht person would be in danger of being subjected to torture, stressing the importance of effective legal and procedural safeguards in this regard and recognizing that diplomatic assurances, where used, do not release States from their obligations under international human rights, humanitarian, and refugee law, in particular the principle of non-refoulement. The Special Rapporteur calls on the Government to ensure a thorough and fair assessment to ascertain whether Mr. Djabbarbergenov is at risk of being tortured or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and urges the Government to take all necessary measures to guarantee that his rights and freedoms are respected. JUA 13/01/2012 Case No. KAZ 5/2011 State reply: None to date Allegations of
widespread acts of violence and excessive use of force against protesters in Zhanaozen,
Mangistau region
The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Kazakhstan has not responded to this communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council. The communication referred to the alleged excessive use of force by law enforcement officials against protestors, including the deaths of many protestors. The Special Rapporteur reiterates principle 4 of the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement, which states that law enforcement officials, in carrying out their duty, shall, as far as possible, apply non-violent means before resorting to the use of force and firearms. They may use force and firearms only if other means remain ineffective or without any promise of achieving the intended result, in accordance with the principles of necessity and proportionality. In addition, if the use of force is unavoidable, principle 5 requires law enforcement officials to: "(a) Exercise restraint in such use and act in proportion to the seriousness of the offence and the legitimate objective to be achieved; (b) Minimize damage and injury, and respect and preserve human life; (c) Ensure that assistance and medical aid are rendered to any injured or affected persons at the earliest possible moment; (d) Ensure that relatives or close friends of the injured or affected person are notified at the earliest possible moment." Without any evidence to the country, the Special Rapporteur determines that the rights of the victims under the Convention against Torture have been violated, and calls on the Government of Kazakhstan to ensure a prompt, independent and impartial investigation, leading to prosecution and punishment of the perpetrators of torture, and to provide full redress to the victims, including fair and adequate compensation, and as full rehabilitation as possible. Kyrgyzstan
AL 11/06/2012 Case No. KGZ 3/2012 State reply: 14/08/2012 Alleged beating and
extraction of confession under torture
The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of Kyrgyzstan for its reply, dated August 14, 2012, to this communication in reference to the alleged torture of of Ms. X to induce her confession while in the presence of her seven-year-old son. Unfortunately, the Government‟s reply notes that no investigation has been opened in the matter of Ms. X‟s allegations of torture under interrogation. Given the information received, the Special Rapporteur determines that the rights to physical and psychological integrity of Ms. X and of her child have been violated, and calls on the Government to investigate, prosecute and punish all cases of torture and to ensure that any evidence obtained under torture is declared inadmissible in trial against the victim. JUA 15/06/2012 Case No. KGZ 2/2012 State reply: 14/08/2012 Alleged arbitrary
detention and torture
The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of Kyrgyzstan for its reply, dated August 14, 2012, to this communication in reference to the alleged torture of Mr. Dilshad Nabijanov. The Government‟s response acknowledges that Mr Nabijanov sustained injuries in the course of his detention in late March and early April of 2012. Several medical examinations confirmed injuries of a light nature. The case concerning his mistreatment was separated from the file on criminal charges faced by Mr. Nabijanov, but it was twice dismissed and reopened. At the time of the government‟s response, the case was pending further inquiries and nominally still open, but no charges had been filed against any perpetrator. The Special Rapporteur recalls paragraph 6b of Human Rights Council Resolution 8/8, which urges States "To take persistent, determined and effective measures to have all allegations of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment promptly and impartially examined by the competent national authority, to hold those who encourage, order, tolerate or perpetrate acts of torture responsible, to have them brought to justice and severely punished, including the officials in charge of the place of detention where the prohibited act is found to have been committed […]." Given the information received, the Special Rapporteur determines that Mr. Nabijanov was indeed mistreated during his arrest or early days of detention, and that the Government has yet to comply with its obligation to investigate, prosecute and punish those who are ultimately found responsible. The Special Rapporteur encourages the Government to remain engaged with the Rapporteurship and to provide information on developments in the case. In addition, since the criminal case for which Mr. Nabijanov was arrested is still pending, the Special Rapporteur reminds the Government of its obligation to exclude any confession or statement obtained under torture from the charges against the defendant.

Source: http://hrlib.kz/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/2013-%D0%9E%D0%B1%D0%B7%D0%BE%D1%80-%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%89%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B8%CC%86-%D0%B8-%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2-%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B2-%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B3..pdf