Convention
Abbreviation:
CAT
COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE
CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS SUBMITTED BY STATES PARTIES UNDER ARTICLE
19 OF THE CONVENTION
Conclusions and recommendations of the Committee against Torture
Netherlands
116. The Committee considered the second periodic report of the Netherlands
(CAT/C/25/Add.1, 2 and 5) at its 210th and 211th meetings, held on 25
April 1995 (CAT/C/SR.210 and 211), and adopted the following conclusions
and recommendations.
A. Introduction
117. The Kingdom of the Netherlands submitted its three reports (European
part of the Kingdom, Antilles and Aruba) partly on time.
118. The Committee thanks the three respective Governments for their
comprehensive reports. The reports were not accompanied by the core
document providing general information on the State party, as required
in the Committee's guidelines (CAT/C/14), but apart from this, they
met all the reporting requirements of the Convention.
119. The Committee listened with interest to the oral reports and clarifications
of the representatives of the three parts of the Kingdom.
120. The Committee wishes to thank the delegation for its reports and
for the spirit of openness and cooperation in which the dialogue was
conducted.
B. Positive
aspects
121. The Committee notes with satisfaction that it has received no information
about alleged perpetration of torture in any of the three parts of the
Kingdom.
122. The Committee also notes that both Antilles and Aruba are preparing
special laws to incorporate fully the provisions of the Convention in
domestic law.
123. The Committee also notes with satisfaction that, according to the
oral information given, force - physical or pharmacological - is no
longer used in connection with the expulsion of asylum seekers.
C. Subjects
of concern
124. With regard to the European part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands,
the Committee has questions about the way in which compensation provisions
apply in practice.
125. With regard to the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba, the Committee
is concerned that the new penal legislation appears not to be in force
yet and thus it is not clear whether the provisions of the Convention
are part of the domestic law.
126. With regard, in particular, to the Netherlands Antilles, the Committee
is concerned about the severeness and the relatively high number of
cases of police brutality which are described in the Government's report,
as well as by information provided to the Committee by non-governmental
organizations. The Committee is particularly concerned about the apparent
failure of the Netherlands Antilles authorities to investigate fully
and deal with such cases.
127. With regard, in particular, to Aruba, the Committee recognizes
that conditions in detention places are far from being satisfactory
and notes that the Government has acknowledged that it is aware of this
situation.
D. Recommendations
128. The Netherlands Antilles and Aruba should give high priority to
speeding up the procedure for the adoption of the act which will incorporate
the provisions of the Convention in domestic law.
129. The Netherlands Antilles should take strong measures to bring to
an end the ill treatment which reportedly occurs in police stations
and to ensure that such allegations are speedily and properly investigated
and that those who may be found guilty of acts of ill treatment are
prosecuted. In this regard, the Committee would appreciate receiving
data concerning the number of investigations by the public prosecutor
and the outcome of them.
130. Aruba should take steps to change the situation with regard to
conditions in police and prison premises and especially to shorten the
period of 10 days in police custody which is allowed under the law.
131. Finally, the Committee is pleased that the Netherlands has agreed
to provide in writing additional information in response to the questions
on the compensation for victims of torture which were raised by the
Committee. The Committee would also appreciate receiving additional
information on whether or not the public prosecutor initiated an investigation
to prosecute General Pinochet when he was on the territory of the Netherlands
and therefore under its jurisdiction. If the answer is yes, the Committee
would like to know on what grounds the investigation was initiated.