The Committee against Torture this afternoon concluded its consideration of the third periodic report of Kyrgyzstan on the efforts made by the State party to implement the provisions of the Convention against Torture. During the dialogue, Committee Experts commended Kyrgyzstan for legislative progress against domestic violence, and asked about assistance for victims of gender-based violence.
A Committee Expert commended Kyrgyzstan for the adoption of the Protection Against Domestic Violence Act in 2017, and the approval of the instructions against domestic violence for police officers. Yet while the law specifically prohibited domestic violence and spousal abuse, violence against women and girls remained a significant yet underreported problem. One Expert also asked the delegation to explain what measures had been taken to establish medical and psychological support, as well as shelter and legal assistance for victims of gender-based and domestic violence, as the Family Violence Law required? It was noted that during the state of emergency due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the media had reported that domestic violence had increased by as much as 60 per cent.
The delegation explained that individuals who had committed domestic violence could be kept up to 48 hours in custody, and administrative arrest could be up to seven days. Perpetrators of domestic violence who refused to carry out the correctional programme could be charged. Women and children who were hiding from domestic tyrants could be provided with material assistance and psychological, legal and medical support. If a criminal case was brought against an alleged perpetrator, a fund helped victims find work. Women who needed it were provided with assistance throughout court proceedings.
Kynatbek Smanaliev, Deputy Minister of Justice of the Kyrgyz Republic and head of the delegation, presenting the report, said that mobile police units were being implemented, which would provide legal advice to the population in areas where the presence of police officers and local government officials was limited. A main task was the prevention of domestic violence. To date, there were 49 such units of mobile community police.
In order to improve the qualifications of judicial and law enforcement personnel in the field of human rights, the curricula for their educational institutions included the prevention of violence, torture and cruel and inhuman treatment; combatting human trafficking; legal and social protection from domestic violence; and combatting bride theft as a violation of the rights of women.
The delegation of Kyrgyzstan consisted of representatives of the Ministry of Health; the General Prosecutor’s Office; the Supreme Court; the State Committee for ³Ô¹ÏÍøÕ¾ Security; the Ministry of Internal Affairs; the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; and the Permanent Mission of Kyrgyzstan to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The webcast of the Human Rights Council meetings can be found . All meeting summaries can be found . Documents and reports related to the Committee against Torture’s seventy-second session can be found .
The Committee will next meet in public at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, 16 November, to begin its consideration of the situation in Nigeria in the absence of an initial report.
Report
The Committee has before it the third periodic report of Kyrgyzstan ().
Presentation of the Report
KYNATBEK SMANALIEV, Deputy Minister of Justice of the Kyrgyz Republic and head of the delegation, presenting the report, informed the Committee about the current internal political situation in the country and recent changes that had not been included in the report to the Committee. Following a national referendum, a new Constitution had been adopted in April 2021. Article 56 of the Constitution said that no one could be subjected to torture and other inhuman, cruel or degrading treatment or punishment. Torture was a crime and committing torture and other forms of cruel and inhuman treatment or punishment entailed criminal liability. The new codes which had been drafted and adopted in the area of criminal procedure to that end were the Criminal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code, the Criminal Administrative Code and the Code on Misdemeanours. The new version of the Criminal Code stipulated that a person guilty of torture could be sentenced to between five and 12 years of prison. In response to civil society comments about delays in investigation, investigators from the procurator’s office, together with investigators from the ³Ô¹ÏÍøÕ¾ Security bodies, were authorised to investigate offences linked to torture.
A specialised office called the “Office on Guaranteeing State Protection” had been created in 2014 under the Interior Ministry and was responsible for ensuring the security of participants of criminal proceedings, including victims of torture. Such victims were also provided with medical and psychological assistance. Non-governmental organizations, the ³Ô¹ÏÍøÕ¾ Centre for the Prevention of Torture, and the Ombudsman Institute also carried out work to combat torture. Overall, the procurator, together with representatives of the Ombudsman and the ³Ô¹ÏÍøÕ¾ Centre for the Prevention of Torture, carried out hundreds of joint spot checks in detention centres and remand facilities. The procurator, without the participation of the national human rights institute, carried out thousands of spot checks in administrative facilities of the Interior Ministry, in prisons, as well as in closed institutions. Since the criminalisation of torture in 2012, 18 officials had been found guilty of the crime. The State Corrections Service had been fitted with CCTV cameras and video surveillance, and officials in charge had been issued with body cameras.
Turning to the issue of domestic violence, Mr. Smanaliev informed the Committee that with the support of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, mobile police units were being implemented, which would provide legal advice to the population in areas where the presence of police officers and local government officials was limited. A main task was the prevention of domestic violence. To date, there were 49 such units of mobile community police.
In order to improve the qualifications of judicial and law enforcement personnel in the field of human rights, the curricula for their educational institutions included the prevention of violence, torture and cruel and inhuman treatment; combatting human trafficking; legal and social protection from domestic violence; and combatting bride theft as a violation of the rights of women. To implement the Manual on Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, also known as the Istanbul Protocol, a practical manual had been developed for Kyrgyzstan by its Ministry of Health. Training for medical examinations in accordance with the Istanbul Protocol had been introduced to the curriculum of the State Medical Institute. Kyrgyzstan was one of the first States in central Asia to successfully mainstream and implement the provisions of the Protocol, Mr. Smanaliev added. Kyrgyzstan was committed to the struggle against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading forms of treatment or punishment, and the dialogue with the Committee was extremely important to the country.
Questions from Committee Experts
ANA RACU, Committee Co-Rapporteur for Kyrgyzstan, noted that the current Criminal Code still did not criminalise torture in accordance with the definition given by the Convention. The crime of torture had been re-categorised from a less serious offense to an especially serious one. According to Kyrgyzstan’s national legislation, could the presidential pardon be applied to perpetrators of torture?
Could the delegation indicate whether a definition of torture that covered all the elements contained in article 1 of the Convention would be adopted and whether torture-related crimes were punishable by appropriate penalties taking into account their grave nature, as set out in article 4, paragraph 2 of the Convention? Turning to the national human rights institution and the national preventive mechanism, she noted that a legal provision created a direct link between the Ombudsman and political forces, preventing him or her from effectively performing his or her function of protecting human rights. She asked for the delegation’s views on the draft law under consideration in Parliament which would amend the procedure for the election and dismissal of the Ombudsman, its legal status, competence, and other matters.
Ms. Racu asked for clarifications on the functioning of the national preventive mechanism due to the interferences in its activity. What specific budgetary or logistical resources had been allocated to the ³Ô¹ÏÍøÕ¾ Centre for the Prevention of Torture so that it could fulfil its mandate according to the requirements of the Optional Protocol to the Convention? How many recommendations related to the prevention of torture and the protection of persons deprived of their liberty had been issued by the ³Ô¹ÏÍøÕ¾ Centre for the Prevention of Torture, and how many of them had been implemented by the State authorities, and to what extent?
Most monitoring groups, including the International Committee of the Red Cross, had reported receiving access to prisons and pre-trial detention facilities, except for those operated by the ³Ô¹ÏÍøÕ¾ Security. Some non-governmental organizations had the right to visit prisons independently as part of their technical assistance, such as medical and psychological care, and Ms. Racu commended Kyrgyzstan for giving them that opportunity. The delegation’s views on ensuring access to human rights non-governmental organizations during the COVID-19 pandemic would be welcome.
Turning to fundamental legal safeguards, Ms. Racu said that according to some reports, there were issues related to the timely registration of detention and respect of the rights of detainees. Practice had shown that the most significant human rights violations, including torture, took place during the first hours following detention before being held in a temporary detention facility, which might last indefinitely.
Could the delegation inform the Committee about how Kyrgyzstan intended to ensure the right of access to a lawyer for all persons deprived of their liberty, including those on administrative arrest and minors, who apparently were the most disadvantaged when it came to legal aid? What steps would the State party take to ensure the effectiveness of the system for free legal representation throughout the criminal procedure, including at the initial stage of police custody?
The right to liberty and security of a person was a constitutional human right, Ms. Racu stated. As for the problem of exceeding the time limits established by law, it was the assessment of the Committee that the prolonged detention of a person in a police temporary facility, such as temporary detention centres of Kyrgyzstan, might amount to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. The law did not establish a time limit for detention for the entire duration of the judicial proceedings, and the Committee would appreciate the delegation’s comments on national legislation concerning the time limit spent in pre-trial detention.
Turning to medical examination at arrest, she asked the delegation to provide relevant information about Kyrgyzstan’s efforts to ensure medical examination on admission in a police detention unit. Were there any recent initiatives aimed at improving the way medical personnel carried out the clinical assessment and physical inspection of inmates? Were the doctors performing those examinations on admission to a pre-trial detention centre reporting to a specific health authority? What were the internal provisions to report cases of possible torture and ill-treatment? Were there any specific registers for injuries or violent incidents? How many such cases were reported during the reporting period, and what were the results of the reported cases in terms of investigations, prosecutions and punishments?
On a positive note, she commended Kyrgyzstan for the adoption of the Protection Against Domestic Violence Act in 2017, and the approval of the instructions against domestic violence for police officers. However, while the law specifically prohibited domestic violence and spousal abuse, violence against women and girls remained a significant yet underreported problem. Among the domestic violence cases brought to court, prosecutors classified a significant number as administrative offenses or misdemeanours, which carried a lighter sentence. During the state of emergency due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the media had reported that domestic violence had increased by as much as 60 per cent. The Committee remained concerned about the high prevalence of violence against women, in particular domestic and sexual violence, and about the lack of statistical information disaggregated by age, nationality and relationship between the victim and the perpetrator on violence against women and its causes.
Could the delegation explain what measures had been taken to establish medical and psychological support, as well as shelter and legal assistance for victims of gender-based and domestic violence, as the Family Violence Law required? What steps had been taken to ensure that the police were more willing to act in response to acts of domestic violence and to treat them as actual human rights violations? Did the delegation have any data on the number of prosecutions and convictions handed down for acts of gender-based and domestic violence for the reporting period? How did courts ensure adequate enforcement of protection orders in cases of domestic abuse? How many temporary banning orders had been issued, and how many people had been convicted for failing to comply with them? The Committee was deeply concerned about the persistent abduction of women and girls for forced marriages that resulted from bride kidnapping, especially in rural and remote areas.
Turning to the issue of trafficking in persons, she said the Committee commended Kyrgyzstan for the adoption of the national action plan on combatting human trafficking for 2013-2016, and the increase of the minimum sentence for human trafficking from three to five years’ imprisonment in the Criminal Code. The Committee was concerned about the lack of information on the number of complaints, investigations, prosecutions and convictions relating to trafficking in women and girls and on support and rehabilitation programmes for victims. Ms. Racu asked the delegation to provide such figures.
Turning to issues around the protection of refugees, asylum-seekers and migrants, she said the Committee greatly appreciated the steps taken by the Government to address the problem of statelessness in the country, noting that Kyrgyzstan was the only country in Central Asia that had undertaken a nation-wide registration campaign to measure the scale of statelessness and reach out to stateless people and those who were at risk of statelessness.
Could the delegation update the Committee on what steps it was taking to investigate serious claims relating to reports indicating Kyrgyzstan had not taken all measures to ensure the principle of non-refoulement in three particular individual cases?
Concerning migrants and asylum seekers, Ms. Racu said the Committee would appreciate any updates on the coordination mechanism, registration, or any recent changes in the legislation or practices aiming at improving the situation of migrants and asylum seekers, including the status of unaccompanied children. How many complaints had been submitted by migrants, and how many of them had been investigated?
Turning to the matter of health care in prisons, she noted that Kyrgyz prisons continued to be impacted by the Soviet legacy and economic crises, adding that prison health care issues were a strong focus of the Committee’s attention. Could the delegation provide some figures for the last years regarding the incidence of tuberculosis among prisoners and the treatment of patients? What were the State party’s views on the prevention of drug use, decriminalising drug use and the protection of prisoners undergoing a methadone programme?
Lastly, Ms. Racu encouraged Kyrgyzstan to make a statement under article 22 of the United Nations Convention against Torture recognising the competence of the Committee against Torture to consider individual communications.
ILVIJA PŪCE, Committee Co-Rapporteur for Kyrgyzstan, said the Committee commended efforts by Kyrgyzstan to eradicate torture or inhuman and degrading treatment, and the country’s report contained a lot of proof of those efforts. Education and training were a cornerstone of prevention of torture. Could the delegation inform the Committee about training specifically related to the prevention of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment? What kind of practical training was provided to staff of law enforcement agencies? As for medical staff training on the Istanbul Protocol, the Committee appreciated that the Ministry of Health had developed a guide related to that Protocol. Could the delegation provide information about training for law enforcement agencies about how to deal with women victims of violence? What training was provided on how to deal with people from the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community?
To investigate a case of torture, it needed to be well-documented, Ms. Pūce noted. Further, could the delegation provide information about how investigative bodies in charge of investigating all charges of torture worked? Who could submit complaints or allegations of torture to these investigative bodies? What was the outcome of the Ombudsman’s Office being informed about the beating of pre-trial detainees? The Committee would like to have statistics about the complaints received by the State ³Ô¹ÏÍøÕ¾ Security Committee. How many complaints from women, juveniles, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, and other groups had been received?
Regarding detention facilities, persons held there were often denied visitors, and pre-trial detention periods were reported to be lengthy. To understand the prison situation better, could the delegation provide the Committee with a list of pre-trial detention facilities and prisons in the country, their official capacity and their actual capacity? How many staff did those facilities have, including medical staff, social workers, psychologists and teachers? The Committee understood that overcrowding was persistent in those establishments, which was a source of many human rights violations. What measures had been taken to reduce overcrowding in places of detention and deprivation of liberty?
The conditions of detention of persons serving life sentences was of particular concern. Could the delegation provide information about the total number of inmates serving life sentences in Kyrgyzstan? Information about the security measures, such as hand-cuffing, strip searching, and the use of dogs, was also requested. Regarding solitary confinement, could the delegation inform about the periods allowed for solitary confinement, and could consecutive periods be imposed? Could juveniles still be placed in solitary confinement, and if so what were the regulations around that?
Ms. Pūce then turned to questions about the treatment of journalists. There had been multiple reports of violence against journalists. Were law enforcement officials provided with information about how to interact with the press at demonstrations? How could journalists report instances of intimidation?
Regarding the situation of human rights defenders, could the delegation provide information about whether allegations of torture had been investigated in the case of Azimjan Askarov?
Could the delegation inform about the situation of children in residential institutions? Was there really no complaint system for children in orphanages and boarding schools? Had there been any investigations into violence in such establishments? On the matter of corporal punishment, it was noted that Kyrgyzstan had accepted recommendations made during the Universal Periodic Review to prohibit it. What were the developments on this issue, when would the Child Code be signed, and would it contain an explicit prohibition of corporal punishment?
