A/hrc/28/68/Add. 1 Advance Version

427. 
     The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Papua New Guinea has not replied to the present communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13, and to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention against Torture (CAT).
     
428. 
     In the absence of information to the contrary, the Rapporteur concludes that there is substance in the allegations presented in the initial communication, that the Commander of the Kundiawa Police Station, the local police, and others have threatened and attacked Mr. X and his family, assaulted Mr. X’s wife, and unlawfully detained other family members. Thus, the Rapporteur concludes that that the Government of Papua New Guinea, by failing to protect Mr. X and his family from physical and psychological wellbeing has violated their right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as provided for in articles 1 and 16 of the CAT.
     

429. 
     The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Papua New Guinea has not replied to the present communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13, and to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention against Torture (CAT).
     
430. 
     In the absence of information to the contrary, the Rapporteur concludes that there is substance in the allegations presented in the initial communication, that asylum-seekers in the Manus Regional Processing Centre have experienced regular threats and intimidation as well as violent attacks, and that two asylum seekers were further subjected to threats and physical ill-treatment for having reported the violent attack. Thus, the Rapporteur concludes that the Government of Papua New Guinea, by failing to protect two asylum seekers who were subjected to intimidation and ill-treatment, has violated their right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as provided for in articles 1 and 16 of the CAT.
     

431. 
     The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of the Philippines has not replied to the present communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13, and to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention against Torture (CAT).
     
432. 
     In the absence of information to the contrary, the Rapporteur concludes that there is substance in the allegations presented in the initial communication, reiterated above, and thus, that the Government of the Philippines, by failing to revise the proposed provisions of the Code of Crimes, will likely violate women and girls’ right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as provided for in articles 1 and 16 of the CAT.
     

433. 
     The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Philippines has not replied to the present communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13, and to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention against Torture (CAT).
     
434. 
     In the absence of information to the contrary, the Rapporteur concludes that there is substance in the allegations presented in the initial communication, that no proceedings in individual cases related to the “Maguindanao Massacre” have concluded; and that witnesses have been killed and their family members have been attacked, threatened, and harassed. Thus, the Rapporteur concludes that the Government of the Philippines, by failing to protect the physical and psychological integrity of at least four witnesses who were subsequently killed and by failing to provide reparations to survivors and their families, has violated their right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as provided for in articles 1 and 16 of the CAT.
     

JUA 24/02/2014 Case No. QAT 1/2014 State Reply: 07/04/2014 Allegations concerning human rights violations regarding the arrest, detention, trial and conviction of Mr. Juan Pablo Iragorri Medina, a Colombian national currently held in detention in the Central Prison in Doha.

435. 
     The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of Qatar for its reply, dated 07.04.2014, to the present communication.
     
436. 
     The Rapporteur takes note of the information provided by the Government regarding the facts of Mr. Irragori Medina’s prosecution. However, he regrets that no substantive investigation, addressing the claims of torture and ill-treatment seems to have taken place.
     
437. 
     The Rapporteur finds that the Government, in its reply, does not sufficiently address the concerns raised in the initial communication, which prompts him to infer that the Government fails to fully and expeditiously cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/23, as well as to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention against Torture (CAT).
     
438. 
     In his interim report to the General Assembly of 5 August 2011 (A/66/268), the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment defined solitary confinement, in accordance with the Istanbul Statement on the Use and Effects of Solitary Confinement, as the physical and social isolation of individuals who are confined in their cells for 22 to 24 hours a day. He observed that while solitary confinement for short periods of time may be justified under certain circumstances, with adequate and effective safeguards in place, the use of prolonged or indefinite solitary confinement may never constitute a legitimate instrument of the State and runs afoul of the absolute prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Furthermore, due to the prisoner’s lack of communication, as well as the lack of witnesses inside the prison, solitary confinement may also give rise to other acts of torture or ill-treatment.
     
439. 
     Being aware of the arbitrary nature of any effort to establish a moment in time when an already harsh regime becomes prolonged and therefore unacceptable, the Special Rapporteur defined prolonged solitary confinement as any period of solitary confinement in excess of 15 days (A/66/268). This definition was based on the large majority of scientific studies which indicate that after 15 days of isolation harmful psychological effects often manifest themselves and may even become irreversible. The Special Rapporteur recalls that when used indefinitely or for long periods, solitary confinement amounts to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment or even torture, because it may cause severe mental and physical pain or suffering, a point which has been reiterated in paragraph 28 of the General Assembly resolution 68/156.
     
440. 
     In the absence of information to the contrary, the Rapporteur concludes that there is substance in the allegations presented in the initial communication, reiterated above, and thus, that the Government of Qatar, by failing to protect the physical and mental integrity of Mr. Irragori Medina, prevent his prolonged solitary confinement, and exclude evidence obtained under torture or ill-treatment, has acted in violation of article 15 of the CAT, and violated his right to be free from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment as provided by articles 1 and 16 or the CAT. With regards to the present case, the Special Rapporteur recalls paragraph 6 of General Comment No. 20 of the Human Rights Committee as well as article 7 of the Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners (Adopted by the General Assembly by resolution 45/111 of 14 December 1990).
     

441. 
     The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of Russian Federation for its reply, dated 19.02.2014, to the present communication.
     
442. 
     The Rapporteur takes note of the information provided by the Government that a judicial investigation was conducted into the allegations of Mr. A’s torture and ill-treatment and that they were dismissed and his conviction upheld. On the other hand, a complaint by Mr. A and his lawyer about the same mistreatment was first dismissed and later reinstated as not having been duly investigated. The latter proceedings are said to be pending, and the Special Rapporteur would welcome an update. Given all this, it appears that no effort has been made to suppress evidence that may have been obtained under torture or at least to reopen the criminal case until such matter is fully determined.
     
443. 
     The Government’s response confirms that Mr. A is not given alternative treatment for his drug addiction and states that Russian law on public health does not make those treatments available. The Rapporteur respectfully submits that certain alternative treatments are science-based and authoritatively recommended by specialized health rights organs, such as the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. They are a viable alternative to what otherwise is treatment that inflicts unnecessary and severe pain and suffering (A/HRC/22/53). Whether or not the aforementioned recommendations are binding as a matter of international law, the Russian Federation is without a doubt bound by the prohibition on cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and must find treatment alternatives that are less painful. In addition, the Standard Minimum Rules on the Treatment of Prisoners establish clearly the obligation to provide inmates with the same standard of health care available in the community.
     
444. 
     The Rapporteur concludes that Mr. A has not been provided with treatment that protects him from cruel, inhuman and degrading means of dealing with his drug addiction. The Rapporteur welcomes the detailed information received and looks forward to the outcome of the inquiry into alleged torture and ill-treatment, as well as its impact on his prosecutions.
     

445. 
     The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of the Russian Federation for its reply, dated 29.01.2014, to the present communication.
     
446. 
     The Rapporteur welcomes the information provided by the Government on an investigation into the whereabouts of Mr. Azimov, as well as the changes made to assure the security of refugees and migrants in Russia. However, he regrets that the Government has failed to provide any substantive information on Mr. Azimov’s fate after his disappearance or to assure the Rapporteur that he has not been extradited back to Tajikistan, in contravention of the decision by the European Court of human Rights.
     
447. 
     The Rapporteur finds that the Government’s reply does not sufficiently address the concerns raised in the initial communication. The Government fails to cooperate fully and expeditiously with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/23, as well as to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention against Torture (CAT).
     
448. 
     In the absence of substantial information to the contrary, the Rapporteur concludes that the Russian Federation is responsible for the disappearance and possible illegal refoulement of Mr. Azimov to Tajikistan, where he faces torture and ill-treatment, in violation of customary international law as codified in article 3 of the CAT, and violated his right to be free from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
     
449. 
     The Rapporteur condemns the illegal extradition and urges the Government of the Russian Federation to rescind it, ensure the return of Mr. Azimov to Russia. Moreover, the Rapporteur calls on the Government to take appropriate measures to ascertain that extraditions, deportations or expulsions in violation of the non-refoulement provision do not take place in the future, including the investigation, prosecution and punishment of those responsible for the illegal extradition of Mr. Azimov to Tajikistan.
     

450. 
     The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of Russian Federation for its reply, dated 20.01.2014, to the present communication.
     
451. 
     The Rapporteur takes note of the information provided by the Government, regarding the criminal prosecution of the thirty Greenpeace activists. However, he regrets that no substantial investigation into the allegations of inhuman and degrading treatment has taken place.
     
452. 
     The Rapporteur finds that the Government’s reply does not sufficiently address the concerns raised in the initial communication. The Government fails to fully and expeditiously cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/23, as well as to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention against Torture (CAT).
     
453. 
     In the absence of substantial information to the contrary, the Rapporteur concludes that the allegations presented in the initial communication have been substantiated. By failing to secure minimum standards for the detention and humane treatment of the Greenpeace activists or to investigate the allegations of inhuman and degrading treatment, the Government of the Russian Federation has violated their right to be free from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment as provided by articles 1 and 16 or the CAT.
     

454. 
     The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of Russian Federation for its reply, dated 14.07.2014, to the present communication.
     
455. 
     The Rapporteur takes note of the information provided by the Government, regarding the criminal prosecution of Mr. Kutayev. However, he regrets that no substantial investigation into the allegations of inhuman and degrading treatment has taken place.
     
456. 
     The Rapporteur finds that the Government’s reply does not sufficiently address the concerns raised in the initial communication. The Government fails to fully and expeditiously cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13, as well as to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention against Torture (CAT).
     
457. 
     In the absence of substantial information to the contrary, the Rapporteur concludes that the allegations presented in the initial communication regarding mistreatment of Mr. Ruslan Kutayev while in detention and threats against his lawyer have been substantiated. They constitute torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment respectively. Therefore, the Government of the Russian Federation has failed to assure the physical integrity of Mr. Kutayev or to secure Mr. Kalaypin’s right to be free from intimidation, which violates their right to be free from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment as provided for in customary international law as codified in articles 1 and 16 or the CAT.
     

458. 
     The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Saudi Arabia has not replied to the present communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13, and to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention Against Torture (CAT).
     
459. 
     In the absence of information to the contrary, the Rapporteur finds that Mr. Al-Harbi is held in prison conditions that amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment as a result of overcrowding and denial of minimal health and safety services. The Government of Saudi Arabia, by failing to protect Mr. Awad Al Harbi against intimidation as a consequence of his work to combat torture, and ensure adequate conditions of detention, has acted in violation of article 13 and denied him his right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as provided by articles 1 and 16 of the CAT.
     

460. 
     The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Saudi Arabia has not replied to the present communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13, and to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention Against Torture (CAT).
     
461. 
     As observed by the Special Rapporteur in his 2012-report to the General Assembly (A/67/279), there is evidence of an evolving standard within international bodies and a robust State practice to frame the debate about the legality of the death penalty within the context of the fundamental concepts of human dignity and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. This evolving standard, along with the resulting illegality of the death penalty under such prohibition, is developing into a norm of customary law, if it has not already done so (para. 74). The Special Rapporteur calls upon all States to reconsider whether the use of the death penalty per se respects the inherent dignity of the human person, causes severe mental and physical pain or suffering and constitutes a violation of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (para. 79).
     
462. 
     In this case, the death penalty was imposed on Ms. Jumadi Ahmad without appropriate consideration of her plea of self-defense or the mitigating circumstance of past abuse and humiliation in the hands of her employer.
     
463. 
     It has come to the attention of the Special Rapporteur that the execution of Ms. Jumadi Ahmad has been called off. The Rapporteur welcomes the decision of the Government of Saudi Arabia to refrain from executing her and strongly urges the Government to refrain from, and abolish, the practice of executions.
     

464. 
     The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Saudi Arabia has not replied to the present communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mad ate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13, and to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention Against Torture (CAT).
     
465. 
     In his interim report to the General Assembly of 5 August 2011 (A/66/268), the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment defined solitary confinement, in accordance with the Istanbul Statement on the Use and Effects Solitary Confinement, as the physical and social isolation of individuals who are confined in their cells for 22 to 24 hours a day. He observed that while solitary confinement for short periods of time may be justified under certain circumstances, with adequate and effective safeguards in place, the use of prolonged or indefinite solitary confinement may never constitute a legitimate instrument of the State and is running afoul the absolute prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Furthermore, due to the prisoner’s lack of communication, as well as the lack of witnesses inside the prison, solitary confinement may also give rise to other acts of torture or ill-treatment.
     
466. 
     In the absence of information to the contrary, the Rapporteur finds that Mr. Al-Khair has been detained for his human rights advocacy, held in solitary confinement, deprived of contact with lawyers and family and subjected to sleep deprivation. By failing to prevent the arbitrary detention, solitary confinement and ill treatment of Mr. Al-Khair the Government of Saudi Arabia violates his right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as provided by articles 1 and 16 of the CAT. With regards to the present case, the Special Rapporteur recalls that these practices have been authoritatively deemed to breach a State’s obligations under international law, inter alia, in paragraph 6 of General Comment No. 20 of the Human Rights Committee and in article 7 of the Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners (Adopted by the General Assembly by resolution 45/111 of 14 December 1990).
     

467. 
     The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Saudi Arabia has not replied to the present communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13, and to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention against Torture (CAT). He notes that the Government had similarly failed to respond to an Urgent Action sent in 2011 regarding allegations to physical and psychological torture against Mr. Al Manasif, a human rights defender.
     
468. 
     In the absence of information to the contrary, the Rapporteur concludes that there is substance in the allegations presented in the initial communication, reiterated above, and thus, that the Government of Saudi Arabia, by failing to protect the physical and psychological integrity of Mr. Al Manasif during his detention, has violated his right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as provided by articles 1 and 16 of the CAT.
     

469. 
     The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Saudi Arabia has not replied to the present communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13, and to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention against Torture (CAT).
     
470. 
     As observed by the Special Rapporteur in his 2012-report to the General Assembly (A/67/279), there is evidence of an evolving standard within international bodies and a robust State practice to frame the debate about the legality of the death penalty within the context of the fundamental concepts of human dignity and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. This evolving standard, along with the resulting illegality of the death penalty under such prohibition, is developing into a norm of customary law, if it has not already done so (para. 74). In particular, certain methods of execution, like beheading, constitute cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment. The Special Rapporteur calls upon all States to reconsider whether the use of the death penalty per se respects the inherent dignity of the human person, causes severe mental and physical pain or suffering and constitutes a violation of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (para. 79). In addition, he calls upon retentionist States to end the practice of executions with little or no prior warning given to condemned prisoners and their families (para. 80 (c)).
     
471. 
     It has come to the attention of the Special Rapporteur, that 22 persons have been executed since August 2014 for the commission of nonviolent crimes including drug smuggling and alleged sorcery. The Rapporteur also expresses grave concern that confessions from detainees were obtained under torture and concern regarding the use of beheading as a form of execution, which is in violation of international law. The Rapporteur strongly condemns the executions and concludes that the Government of Saudi Arabia has acted in violation of article 15 of the CAT, and violated their right to be free from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment as provided by articles 1 and 16 or the CAT. The Rapporteur calls on the Government of Saudi Arabia to take appropriate measures in order to ascertain that the practice of executions be abolished in the future, including by undertaking a prompt, impartial, and effective investigation of the alleged acts of torture, prosecuting and punishing the responsible for those acts, and providing redress to families of the victims.
     

472. 
     The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of Saudi Arabia has not replied to the present communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13, and to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention against Torture (CAT).
     
473. 
     In his interim report to the General Assembly of 5 August 2011 (A/66/268), the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment defined solitary confinement, in accordance with the Istanbul Statement on the Use and Effects of Solitary Confinement, as the physical and social isolation of individuals who are confined in their cells for 22 to 24 hours a day. He observed that while solitary confinement for short periods of time may be justified under certain circumstances, with adequate and effective safeguards in place, the use of prolonged or indefinite solitary confinement may never constitute a legitimate instrument of the State and it runs afoul of the absolute prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Furthermore, due to the prisoner’s lack of communication, as well as the lack of witnesses inside the prison, solitary confinement may also give rise to other acts of torture or ill-treatment.
     
474. 
     Being aware of the arbitrary nature of any effort to establish a moment in time when an already harsh regime becomes prolonged and therefore unacceptable, the Special Rapporteur defined that prolonged solitary confinement is any period of solitary confinement in excess of 15 days (A/66/268) under conditions of total isolation. This definition was based on the large majority of scientific studies which indicate that after 15 days of isolation harmful psychological effects often manifest and may even become irreversible. For solitary confinement that includes some mitigating factors, such as access to reading and writing materials, radio or television, the term of legitimate use of isolation may exceed 15 days but would still have to be counted in days, not weeks or months or years. The Special Rapporteur recalls that when used indefinitely or for long periods, solitary confinement amounts to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment or even torture, because it may cause severe mental and physical pain or suffering, a point which has been reiterated in paragraph 28 of the General Assembly resolution 68/156.
     
475. 
     The Special Rapporteur recalls that any form of corporal punishment constitutes cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment in violation of customary international law. An imposition of such penalty, even if not actually executed, is itself a threat of pain and suffering of a mental nature that is equally prohibited by international law.
     
476. 
     In the absence of information to the contrary, the Rapporteur concludes that there is substance in the allegations presented in the initial communication, that members of ACPRA, including Mr. Sheikh Suliaman al-Rashudi, Dr. Abdullah al-Hamid, Dr. Mohammad al-Qahtani, Dr. Abdulkareem Yousef al-Khoder, Mr. Mohammed Saleh al-Bajadi, Mr. Omar al-Hamid al-Saeed and Dr. Abdulrahman al-Hamid have been arbitrarily detained and have been placed in solitary confinement and incommunicado detention. Thus, that the Government of Saudi Arabia, by failing to protect the physical and mental integrity of the members of ACPRA, has violated their right to be free from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment as provided by articles 1 and 16 or the CAT. With regards to the present case, the Special Rapporteur recalls paragraph 6 of General Comment No. 20 of the Human Rights Committee as well as article 7 of the Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners (Adopted by the General Assembly by resolution 45/111 of 14 December 1990).