Aadel Collection
Report by the Special Rapporteur, Mr. S. Amos Wako, appointed pursuant to Economic and Social Council resolution 1986/36 of 23 May 1986
- - . . w _ . . _ - - - - - -——— r . - . . : :z.. -. :.. . ::. :.... : = t . , a . c - . . - . - : .. .. - . .. :. i... . S.. .. - - . : . -:.. : . ..
UNITED E
NATIONS
( .
Economic and Social
Council
GE RAL
Distr.
E/CU.4/1987/20
22 January 1987
Original: ENGLISH
COMMISSION ON HUMAN BIGHTS
Forty—third session
Item 12 of the provisional agenda
QUESTION OF THE VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS
IN ANY PART OF TH WORLD, WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO COLONIAL
AND OTHER DEPENDENT COUNTRIES AND TERRITORIES
Sunuary or arbitrary executions
Report by IIe Special Rapporteur, Mr. S. A mos Wako, appointed
pursuant to Economic and Social Council resolution 1986/36 of
. 23 May 1986
GE. 87—1O1Ol/675OE
E/CN.4/1987/20
page ii
CONTENTS
Chapter Paragraphs Pages
Introduction 1 — 6 1
I. ACTIVITIES OF THE SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR 7 — 65 2
A. Consultations 8 2
B. Communications 9 — 23 2
1. Request for information 9 — 12 2
2. Allegations of summary or arbitrary
executions 13 — 21 2
3. Visits by representatives of
Governments 22 — 23 3
C. Urgent appeals to Governments 24 — 60 3
B. Joint hearings on southern Africa 61 8
E. Visit to Uganda 62 — 65 8
I I. SITUATIONS 66 — 166 10
III. ANALYSIS OF PHENOMENA 167 — 234 26
A. Absence of investigation, prosecution
and/or punishment in cases of death in
suspicious circumstances 171 — 181 26
B. Death sentences passed after a trial
without adequate safeguards to protect
the right to life 182 — 197 28
C. Situations of restored or new
democracies 198 — 234 3 ].
IV , CONCLUSIONS A1 RECOMMENDATIONS 235 — 249 36
Annexes
I. Joint hearings on southern African (4 to 15 August 1986)
II. Visit to Uganda (17 to 20 August 1986)
E/CN. 4/1987/20
page 1
Introduction
1. The present report is submitted pursuant to Economic and Social Council
resolution 1986/36 of 23 Nay 1986 entitled “Summary or arbitrary executions”.
This is the fifth report of the Special Rapporteur since he was first
appointed in 1982 under Economic and Social Council resolution 1982/35.
2. In his four previous reports (E/CN,4/1983/16 and Add.l, E/CN.4/1984/29,
E/CN.4/1984/17 and E/CN.4/1986/21) the Special Rapporteur dealt with a wide
range of issues concerning the phenomenon of summary or arbitrary executions,
as well as reporting on allegations of incidents of summary or arbitrary
executions and the activities of the Special Rapporteur, including his urgent
appeals to Governments. As the mandate of the Special Rapporteur has been
regularly renewed by the Economic and Social Council, the Special Rapporteur
has examined the phenomenon from various aspects with a view to presenting a
comprehensive picture of the phenomenon of summary or arbitrary executions in
the contemporary world.
3. It may be recalled that the Speci:l OEpporteur stated in his latest
report (E/CN.4/1986/21) that the inter at 'nal community should continue to
monitor the phenomenon of summary or ata ..rary executions and in particular to
devise ways and means of/4ntervening effectively in situations of imminent or
threatened summary or arbitrary execution, (para. 207), and that it was
necessary to develop international standards designed to ensure that
investigations were conducted on all cases of suspicious death, (para. 209).
OEis statement was endorsed by Economic and Social Council resolution 1986/36
as well as by General Assembly resolution 41/144, of 4 ) acember 1986 entitled
“Summary or arbitrary executions”. The Special Rapporteur is gratified to
note a new momentum now being developed in his mandate by the addition of a
prescriptional phase to the on—going diagnostic approach.
4. The Special Rapporteur, aware of this new development of his mandate, has
followed the general structure of his last report. The present report
describes allegations of actual or imminent executions, which have been duly
communicated to the Governments concerned and summarizes replies by those
Governments . The Special Rapporteur then analyses, in chapter III, the
phenomenon of summary or arbitrary executions on the basis of the information
received and replies from the Governments concerned. Particular attention is
drawn to two issues, both of which are seen at present as basic factors in
incidents or situations of summary or arbitrary execution. They are the
absence of investigation, prosecution and/or punishment in cases of death in
suspicious circumstances, and death sentences as a result of trials without
adequate safeguards to protect the right to life.
5. Furthermore in chapter UI the Special Rapporteur analyses situations in
a number of countries where summary or arbitrary executions were widely
reported in the past and newly established Governments have publicly pledged
their commitment to human rights, with a view to identifying achievements,
obstacles and needs in those situations.
6. Finally, the Special Rapporteur gives conclusions and recommendations,
which are based on his analysis of the information and consideration of
feasible steps to be taken in the context of his mandate.
E/CN . 4/1987f20
page 2
I. ACTIVITIES OF THE SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR
7. During the past year the Special Rapporteur engaged in activities that
fall within the sphere of his mandate as described below.
A. Consultations
8. The Special Rapporteur visited the Centre for Human Rights in July and
October 1986 for consultations and again in January 1987 to finalize his
report.
B. Communications :
1 , Request for information
9, On 16 June 1986, a note verbale was sent to Governments seeking
information concerning the question of summary or arbitrary executions.
A similar request was sent by a letter of the same date to United Nations
bodies, specialized agencies, intergovernmental organizations, liberation
movements and non—governmental organizations.
10. In the course of his present mandate the Special Rapporteur has received
replies from the following Governments: Antigua and Barbuda, Bahrain,
Bolivia, Chad, Denmark, Dominica, Germany, Federal Republic of, Iraq, Japan,
Kuwait, Madagascar, Mali, Niger, Philippines, Poland, Sweden, Thailand,
Venezuela and tugoslavia.
11. Replies were also received from the Commission of the European
Communities, the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL) and the
Organization of American States.
12. Replies were also received from the following non—governmental
organizations in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council:
Amnesty International, Baha'i International Community, Commission of the
Churches on International Affairs of the World Council of Churches,
International Association of Democratic Lawyers, International Association of
Penal Law, International Commission of Jurists, International Committee of the
Red Cross, International Confederation of Free Trade Unions, International
Federation of Human Rights, Pa c Romana, World Federation of Trade Unions and
World Federation of United Nations Associations.
2. Allegations of summary or arbitrary executions
13. The Special Rapporteur sent letters to Governments concerning allegations
of summary or arbitrary executions in their countries as follows: on
9 June 1986 to 12 Governments, 25 July 1986 to one Government, 29 October 1986
to 10 Governments, 32 October 1986 to one Government, and 11 November 1986 to
one Government.
14. On 10 June 1986 letters were sent to 13 Governments whjch had not replied
to the Special Rapporteur's letters sent in 1985 and earlier concerning
allegations made with regard to their countries. In those letters the
Special Rapporteur again requested information on a4.leged cases of summary or
arbitrary executions, which had previously been transmitted to the Governments.
E/CN.4/1987/20
page 3
15. On 28 August 1986 cables were sent to 10 Governments, to which letters
had been sent on 10 June 1986 and which had not replied, again inviting then
to provide information on the above—mentioned alleged cases of summary or
arbitrary executions.
16. On 14 october 1986 cables were sent to 12 Governments concerning alleged
cases of summary or arbitrary executions which had been transmitted to those
Governments earlier in 1986, inviting them to provide information thereon.
17. In 1986 the Special Rapporteur communicated to a total of 21 Governments
allegations of summary or arbitrary executions reported to have taken place in
their countries: Bangladesh, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, El Salvador, Ethiopia,
Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Liberia,
Nicaragua, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, South Africa,
Venezuela and Zimbabwe.
18. At the time of completion of the present report, replies had been
received from 11 Governments, namely Bangladesh, Chile, Colombia, Guatemala,
India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Paraguay, Peru, the Philippines and Venezuela.
19. In addition, a reply was received from the Government of Benin to the
allegations communicated to the Government in October 1984 and in
January 1986. These allegations and the Government's reply are reflected in
paragraphs 72 to 75. .
20. Furthermore, information was received from the Government of Sri Lanka
concerning the situation and recent developments in that country.
21. These letters and the replies thereto are summarized in chapter II
below. The full texts are available for consultation in the Secretariat files.
3. Visits by representatives of Governments
22. The Special Rapporteur was visited at the Centre for Human Rights,
United Nations Office at Geneva, by representatives of the Governments of
Afghanistan, Guatemala, India, Indonesia and Venezuela in October 1986 and/or
January 1987 concerning allegations of summary or arbitrary executions which
had been transmitted in 1986 or earlier. .
23. In addition, on 7 January 1987 the representative of the Government of
Sri Lanka visited the Special Rapporteur at the Centre for Human Rights and
briefed him on the present situation in Sri Lanka and the attempts being made
to resolve the crisis.
C. Urgent appeals to Governments
24. The Special Rapporteur, in the course of his mandate, received
information containing allegations of imminent or threatened summary
executions which appeared prima facie relevant to his mandate. In this
context the Special Rapporteur addressed an urgent message by cable (by letter
in the case of Chile) to the Governments concerned requesting information
concerning those allegations. The Governments are: I3angladesh, Chile, Congo,
Guinea Bissau, Islamic Republic of Iran, Kuwait, Lesotho, Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya, Pakistan, Somalia and Suriname. Replies were received from the
Governments of Bangladesh, Chile and Pakistan.
E/CN ,411987/20
page 4
25. On 16 october 1986 cables were sent to six Governments which had not
replied to the Special Rapporteur's messages sent in 1986, reiterating the
request for information on the cases in question.
26. These appeals and the replies received are summarized below. The full
texts are available for consultation in the Secretariat files.
Bangladesh
27. A message was sent on 26 February 1986 concerning the case of a person,
reportedly under 18 years of age, who was sentenced to death on 23 June 1985
by special Military Court in Dhalca and whose petition was later rejected. The
Special Rapporteur had addressed a similar message on this case to the
Government on 10 December 1985 (see E/CN.4/1986f21, paras. 26—27). The
Special Rapporteur requested information on the procedures of the Special
Martial Law Court against whose sentence, it was alleged, r io appeal was
permitted. .
28. Information was subsequently received that the person was executed on
27 February 1986. ,
29. A message was sent on 27 June 1986 concerning the case of four persons,
originally sentenced to life imprisonment in January 1986 by the Special
Martial Law Court, whose sentences were subsequently augmented by the martial
law authorities on 31 May 1986 to the death penalty.
30. on 4 November 1986, the Permanent Mission of Bangladesh to the
United Nations Office at Geneva informed the Special Rapporteur that the Chief
Martial Law Administrator had commuted the death sentences given to the four
persons to Life imprisonment.
31. A message was sent on 21 July 1986 concerning the case of three persons
who were sentenced to death by the Special Martial Law Court and who had had
their sentences confirmed by the Chief Martial Law Aministrator, The
special Rapporteur inquired into the procedures of the Special Martial Law
Court, in particular regarding the right to appeal to a higher tribunal which,
it was alleged, was not permitted.
32. At the time of the preparation of this report, no reply to the latest
message had been received from the Government of Bangladesh.
Chile
33. A message was sent by letter dated 1 october 1986 concerning the death of
four persons who had been abducted by unidentified men immediately after the
declaration of a state of siege on 7 september 1986. The special Rapporteur
expressed concern for the life of those persons and in general for the lack of
protection of the right to life of individuals reportedly missing, and
referred to similar situations in the past when individuals taken into custody
in similar circumstances had eventually been found dead. The
Special Rapporteur also requested information on the outcome of the
investigations and measures taken to protect people's lives.
E / CN . 4 I 1987 / 20
page 5
34. A reply dated 13 November 1986 was received from the Permanent Mission of
Chile to the United Nations Office at Geneva. A summary of the reply is found
in chapter II, paragraphs 84 to 85.
Congo
35, A message was sent on 21 August 1986 concerning the case of a person who
was allegedly sentenced to death by the Cour r4volutionnaire de justice de
Brazzaville on 17 August 1986. It was reported that the procedures of the
court did not provide for the right to appeal to a higher tribunal.
36. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of the Congo.
Guinea l3issau
37. A message was sent on 15 July 1986 concerning the case of 12 persons
sentenced to death on 12 July 1986 by the Tribunal Superior Militar who were
allegedly not given the right to appeal to a higher tribunal. .
38. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of Guinea Bissau.
39. It was subsequently reported that six of the 12 had been executed and the
other six had had their sentences commuted to life imprisonment.
Islamic Republic of Iran
40. A message was sent on 7 July 1986 concerning the alleged imminent
execution of five persons at Evin prison in Tehran, without due regard to the
safeguards envisaged in the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights for the protection of the right to life. The Special Rapporteur
expressed concern over the alleged execution without trial of three persons on
4 May 1986 in Tehran, another person on 9 May 1986 in Zahidan and another on
10 June 1986 in Tehran and also about the alleged abduction and killing of a
person on the outskirts of Tebran. It was reported that all these persons
belonged to the Baha'i faith. The Special Rapporteur requested information on
these allegations and in particular on the measures taken to ensure a fair
trial.
41. It was subsequently reported that a retrial of the five persons referred
to above had been ordered.
42. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
43. A message was sent on 29 August 1986 concerning the case of a person who
was allegedly facing imminent execution after having been sentenced to death
in 1985 and after the sentence had been approved by the High Judicial
Council. The Special Rapporteur requested information on these allegations
and on the trial and its procedures which, it was stated, were not public.
44. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
I
E/CN.4 11987/20
page 6
Kuwait
45. A message was sent on 11 December 1986 concerning the case of a person
allegedly sentenced to death by the State Security Court on 29 November 1986
after a trial held in camera ; no appeal aainst the sentence was allowed. The
Special Rapporteur requested information on those allegations and on the legal
basis of in camera proceedings and the safeguards of the rights of the accused.
46. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of Kuwait.
Lesotho
47. A message was sent on 14 August 1986 concerning reports of activities of
so—called ‘vigilantes” resulting in the death of innocent individuals in
Lesotho, in particular the report of the death of three persons on or about
22 July 1986 in Maseru. Concern was expressed for the life of other civilians
and information was requested on the precautions taken to protect persons
whose lives might be in jeopardy as a result of the activities of the
so—called “vigilantes” and the measures taken to control and suppress their
activities. The Special Rapporteur also inquired about the circumstances in
which the three named persons had died and asked whether investigations had
been carried out to establish who was responsible and what action, if any, the
Government proposed to take against them. It was alleged that the
“vigiliantes” included members of the security forces of South Africa and
Lesotho.
48. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of Lesotho.
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
49. A message was sent on 24 october 1986 concerning the case of
eight persons said to be detained in Benghazi, who were allegedly facing
imminent execution, possibly without trial by a tribunal. The Special
Rapporteur asked for a stay of execution and inquired about the procedures
that had been followed including trial and appeal.
50. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.
Pakistan
51. A message was sent on 5 March 1986 concerning the cases of four persons
who were allegedly sentenced to death by the Special Military Court and whose
sentences had been confirmed by the President. Two of the four were sentenced
to death in February 1986 by Special Military Court No. 62 in Multan; two
others were sentenced to death on 3 March 1986 by the Special Military Court
in Sukkur. The Special Rapporteur inquired about these cases and in
particular the procedures of the Special Military Court which, it was stated,
did not provide for the right of appeal to a higher tribunal.
EtCH. 4/1987/20
page 7
52. A reply was received in July 1986 from the Minister for Foreign Affairs,
informing the Special Rapporteur that the four persons had been sentenced to
death in accordance with the law, that they had been given a full opportunity
to defend themselves, that the right of appeal against the death sentence
existed under article 7 of the Martial Law (Pending Proceedings) Order,
9$5, */ and that the Constitution of Pakistan also empowered the President to
grant pardon, reprieve or respite and to remit, suspend or commute any
sentence by any court, tribunal or other authority.
Somalia
53. A message was sent on 26 February 1986 concerning the case of a person
who was allegedly sentenced to death by the National Security Court in
Hargeisa in October 1984 and whose death sentence was subsequently confirmed.
The Special Rapporteur requested information on the trial which, it was
alleged, was of a summary nature, following which no appeal to a higher
tribunal was possible.
54. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of Somalia.
55. It was subsequently reported that the person was executed in Mandera
prison on or about 19 March 1956.
56. A message was sent on 4 July 1986 concerning the case of four persons who
were allegedly sentenced to death by the regional section of the National
Security Court in Hargeisa on 31 May 1986 after a trial which was said to have
lasted only a few hours. The Special Rapporteur inquired about the allegedly
summary procedures of the National Security Court in which, it was stated,
defendants did not have the right to legal representation or to appeal against
their sentence to a higher tribunal.
57. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of Somalia.
Suriname
58. A message was sent on 17 December 1986 concerning the deaths of a
considerable number of persons during the preceding months in circumstances
which indicated that they might have occurred in a summary or arbitrary manner
/ OEe Special Rapporteur subsequently received information on this
article which stipulates:
“1. Any person who deems himself aggrieved by the sentence passed
by a military court may submit a petition to the President, if the
sentence is one of death or amputation of hand...
2. On such a petition the President . . . may annul the proceedings
or, with or without any conditions, grant pardon or remit, reduce,
commute or suspend any sentence or reject the petition. . .“
E/CN .4/1987/20
page 8
and as a result of action by members of the military, police or People's
Militia. Eight such incidents were described. The Special Rapporteur
expressed concern over the lack of protection of the right to life of
individuals in general and requested information on the incidents and their
investigation, including post—mortem findings, as well as on the action taken,
if any, by the Government in regard to those responsible. The
Special Rapporteur requested information on measures taken by the Government
to prevent civilian death resulting from the action of members of the
military, police or People's Militia.
59. Furthermore, the Special Rapporteur addressed a letter to the Government
of Suriname on 9 January 1981, referring to his message of 17 December 1986
and his report to the Commission on the visit he had undertaken to Suriname in
T2 July 1984 at the invitation of the Government. In his letter the
Special Rapporteur recalled the efforts described to him at that time, which
were planned to bring about a return to democracy, and the special desire then
expressed to prevent any future occurrence of summary or arbitrary
executions. The Special Rapporteur expressed concern at recent developments
and inquired as to the arrangements envisaged to establish a system which
would protect and respect the right to life. He requested information
relating to such measures and to the subject of his message of
17 December 1986.
60. The Special Rapporteur informed the Government of his availability for
contacts and dialogue.
0. Joint hearings on southern Africa -
61. The Special Rapporteur, together with members of the Ad Hoc Working Group
of Experts on southern Africa, met in Lusaka, Zambia, for joint hearings on
H: southern Africa from 4 to 15 August 1986. The information obtained at the
joint hearings is reflected in chapter I, section C (paras. 41—48) and
chapter II (pans. 149—150) and an account of the joint hearings is contained
in annex I to this report.
E. Visit to Uganda
62. In addition to the foregoing, the Special Rapporteur, in the context of
his mandate, visited Uganda from 17 to 20 August 1986 with the agreement of
the Government.
63. It may be recalled that the Special Rapporteur had addressed letters to
the Government of Uganda on si october 1984 and 25 July 1985 transmitting
allegations of summary or arbitrary executions. These allegations were
reflected in the Special Rapporteur's report to the forty—second session of
the Commission on Human Rights (EfCN ,4/1986/21, paras. 94—95 and 142—143).
64. Following the establishment of the Interim Government by the National
Resistance Movement in January 1986, the statement of the Minister for Foreign
Affairs before the Commission on Human Rights on 6 March 1986 and the
announcement in May 1986 of the establishment of the Commission of Inquiry
into Violation of Human Rights, the Special Rapporteur proposed on
El CN. 4 / 1987 / 20
page 9
2]. July 1986 to visit Uganda with a view to following up on the allegations he
had received and informing himself of the functions and the work of the
Commission of Inquiry.
65. During his visit to Uganda, the Special Rapporteur met Government
officials, members of the Commission of Inquiry and other individuals and
visited places relevant to the subject of his mandate. The outcome of this
visit is reflected in chapter lIt, section C (pares. 226—234) and an account
of the visit to Uganda is contained in annex It to this report.
is . . 1
I
•1
: 1
E/Ct .4/1987/20
page 10
II. SITUATIONS
66. The information received by the Special Rapporteur in the course of his
present mandate includes allegations of executions or deaths which may have
taken place in the absence of the safeguards designed to protect the right to
life embodied in various international instruments, such as the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (arts. 4, 6, 7, 9, 14 and 15), the
Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Economic and Social
Council resolutions 663 C (XXIV) of 31 July 1957 and 2076 (LXII) of
13 May 1977), the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials
(General Assembly resolution 34/169 of 17 December 1979), the Convention
against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
(General Assembly resolution 39/46 of 10 December 1984), and the Safeguards
guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty
F adopted by the Economic and Social Council in resolution 1984/50 of
25 May 1984.
67. This information generally related to allegations of the following nature:
(a) Actual or imminent executions:
(I) Without a trial;
(ii) With a trial but without safeguards designed to protect the
rights of the defendant as provided for in article 18 of the
above—mentioned Covenant;
(b) Deaths Which took place:
Ci) As a result of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment
during detention;
(ii) As a result of abuse of force by police, military or any other
) governmental or quasi—governmental forces;
(iii) As a result of assault by paramilitary groups under official
control;
(iv) As a result of assault by groups opposing the Government or not
under its control,
Bangladesh
68. On 29 October 1986 a letter was addressed to the Government of Bangladesh
transmitting information alleging that during the past several years members
H of the indigenous tribes in the Chittagong Hill Tracts had died as a result of
the action of non—tribal people in the area, undertaken at the instigation of,
or condoned by, the responsible law enforcement personnel and in some cases
H with their direct involvement. Three such alleged incidents reported to the
Special Rapporteur, during 1986, were described by way of example.
69. The Special Rapporteur referred to article 6, paragraph 1, of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and, to the extent that
( the alleged deaths occurred as a result of acts attributable to the police and
armed forces, to the United Nations Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement
E/CN.4/19B7/20
page 11
Officials; he inquired about the measures taken to ensure adequate protection
of the right to life, and in particular, requested detailed information on the
deaths reported, including the circumstances in which they had occurred, the
relevant investigations carried out and the action taken against those
responsible.
70. On 26 November 1986 a reply was received from the Permanent Mission of
Bangladesh to the United Nations Office at Geneva 0 cerning the three
incidents described by the Special Rapporteur to the Government of Bangladesh.
71. According to the letter the description given in the allegations of those
incidents was not correct, in that they had occurred when an indigenous group
attacked local settlers, killing a number of persons. In two of the three
incidents, the local settlers had retaliated and violence followed. The
situation had eventually been brought under control by the law enforcement
authorities, In the Khagrachari—Panchari areas, which are thickly populated
by both the indigenous groups and the local settlers, the security forces had
not been strong enough to tackle the situation and the violence between these
two groups of people had gone on for two days. It was only with great
difficulty that the security forces had brought the situation under control.
B en in
72. On 31 October 1984 a letter was addressed to the Government of the
People's Republic of Benin transmitting allegations concerning eight cases of
death in detention at Cotonou Central Prison between mid—1983 and
February 1984 and in May 1984, allegedly due to j 5 anitary conditions in the
prison and refusal of medical treatment by the prison authoriti.es,
73 . The Special Rapporteur, referring to article 6, paragraph 1, and
article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and political Rights and also
to the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, requested
information on the allegations and in particular on the safeguards envisaged
and applied to prevent deaths in detention. On 2g January 1986 the
Special Rapporteur, in response to a request by the Government, communicated.
further information concerning the above—mentioned cases.
I I 74. On 8 December 1986 a reply was received from the Permanent Representative
of the People's Republic of Benin to the United Nations Office at Geneva,
stating that the Government had conducted investigations on the eight cases,
according to which two of the eight had died of vitamin deficiency and a
generally bad state of health; three had died of diarrhoea following
vomiting; and two had died of unidentified causes. one case could not be
successfully traced. It was emphasized that the above—mentioned cases were
nt,t to be considered as deliberate violations by the state of the right to
life as stipulated in the International. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
75. It was further stated that, due to the steady increase in the prison
population resulting from the sharp increase in crime, on the one hand, and
the limited resources available to the prison administration, on the other,
there remained much to be done in regard to the health of the detainees in
p rison. The authorities concerned were said to be nducting a careful study
With a view to improving conditions of life and health iffi prisons, including
projects for the construction of prison farms in every province of the country.
: 1 , 4
E/CN.4 11987/2O
page 12
Brazil
76. On 29 October 1986 a letter was addressed to the Government of Brazil
stating that a number of rural workers, peasants and pastoral workers had
allegedly been killed by persons hired for the purpose, as occurred in
preceding years (see E/CN. iI1986f21, paras. 66—67). In a number of cases of
deaths, the involvement of local police was alleged. These incidents occurred
in the context of land disputes in several regions of the country. According
to an official report entitled “Conflitos da Terra' (“Land Conflicts”) issued
: by the Ministry of Agrarian Reform and Development in February 1986,
261 persons were reportedly killed in 1985 in connection with land disputes.
These allegedly included 188 peasants or rural workers, 14 trade—unionists,
8 Indians, 4 lawyers, 1 priest, 2 church workers and 28 others described as
“landowners or those claiming to be landowners and pistoleiros (gunmen)”. It
was alleged that the actual number of deaths would be higher. The Ministry of
Agrarian Reform and Development (MOEAD) announced on 13 June l986 that
between January and mid—June 1986 it had received reports of 125 killings in
connection with disputes over landownership.
77. The Special Rapporteur therefore requested information on the measures
taken by the Government to ensure adequate protection of the right to life of
the individual, particularly following publication of the report of the
Ministry of Agrarian Reform and Development .
HI 78. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of Brazil.
Chile
79. On 1 october 1985, the Special Rapporteur addressed a letter to the
Permanent Representative of Chile to the United Nations Of f ice at Geneva
, “ concerning four cases of deaths which had occurred immediately after the
declaration of the stage of siege on 7 September 1986.
80. On 29 october 1986 the Special Rapporteur addressed a letter to the
Permanent Representative of Chile to the United Nations Office at Geneva,
, : ‘ referring to the reports prepared by the Special Rapporteur of the Commission
on Human Rights on the situation of human rights in Chile, in particular,
A/401647 submitted to the fortieth session of the General Assembly and
;: FJCN.41198612 submitted to the forty—second session of the Commission on
Human Rights. These two reports mentioned cases which allegedly concerned the
right to life (A14O1647, appendix III, addendum 1, pp. 28—30; E/CN.4/l986/2,
H chap. III. sect. A., pp. 28—46).
81. The Special. Rapporteur took note that the Special Rapporteur on the
situation of human rights in Ch .le subsequently received detailed information
from the Government of Chile concerning the above—mentioned cases (A/41/523).
82. In the same letter the Special Rapporteur further referred to the report,
submitted by the special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Chile
to the General Assembly at its forty—first session (A/41/719), which mentioned
a number of other cases that allegedly affected the right to life, and to the
cases mentioned in his letter of 1 October 1986.
E/CN.4/1987/20
page 13
83. The Special Rapporteur requested information on the measures taken to
ensure adequate protection of the right to life and, in particular, detailed
information on the deaths reported, the surrounding circumstances, the
relevant investigations to establish responsibility, and the action taken
against those responsible.
84. On 13 November 1986, a letter was received from the Permanent Mission of
Chile to the United Nations Office at Geneva transmitting a reply and
referring to information on the human rights situation in Chile, including the
cases referred to above received by the Special Rapporteur of the Commission
on Human Rights on the situation of human rights in Chile, and conveying the
Government's view that it was inappropriate for more than one special
rapporteur of the same Commission to deal with the same situation.
85. Regarding the four persons who were abducted and later killed, referred
to in the letter dated 1 October 1986, the Government of Chile reported that
it had strongly condemned the practice of political crimes and had taken the
necessary measures to prevent the recurrence of such cases. The Government,
in keeping with the recommendation by the Interior Ministry's Advisory
Committee on Human Rights, had decided to set up a special team of the civil
police, acting under the direct instructions of the tribunals dealing with the
respective judicial proceedings, to investigate such crimes. The
investigation of the four cases was in an advanced stage and, due to the fact
that they were related, it was possible that at least three of them would be
dealt with in one trial. The inquiries had currently reached the pre—trial
stage.
Colombia
86. On 9 June 1986 a letter was addressed to the Government of Colombia
transmitting allegations concerning five cases of deaths which occurred
between November 1985 and April 1986. The victims were three persons
allegedly associated with the M—19 Movement, a vice—president of a peasants'
association and a member of an organization of relatives of disappeared
persons. The involvement of security forces was alleged in those deaths.
Among the five cases, one concerned a member of the M—19 Movement, who was
allegedly killed at the time of the Movement's occupation of the Supreme Court
building in November 1985, after having been taken out of the Court building
a live.
87. The Special Rapporteur, referring to article 6, paragraph 1, of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the United Nations
Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, requested information on
regulations and practices regarding the conduct of law enforcement agents and
troops to ensure adequate protection of the right to life of individuals.
88. On 13 August 1986 a reply was received from the Permanent Representative
of Colombia to the United Nations Office at Geneva, transmitting the report by
a special investigating tribunal on the events which had taken place at the
Supreme Court building in Bogota on 6 and 7 November 1985. According to the
conclusions reached by the special tribunal, the group known as the
“Movimiento Diecinueve de Abril' (M-.l9) was solely responsible for the attack
and occupation of the Supreme Court building, which resulted in 88 deaths and
many injuries, The special tribunal concluded that the intervention by the
security forces, ordered by the President of the Republic
EfCN.4/l987/20
page 14
in order to end the occupation and rescue the host ages, was necessary and
appropriate. Nevertheless, there were several isolated cases of
irregularities committed by certain members of the security forces in
contravention of orders given by their superiors. These cases concerned in
particular the unexplained death or disappearance of six of the attackers, who
had allegedly been taken from the Supreme Court building alive at the end of
the military rescue operation. The special tribunal recommended that those
cases be further investigated with a view to identifying those responsible.
89. With regard to the remaining four cases referred to in paragraph 86, on
13 Dece mber 1986 the Permanent Representative of Colombia transmitted
information from the Office of the Prosecutor to the effect that those cases
were still under investigation and a report by the Military Prosecutor
concerning one of the four cases which stated that, after a preliminary
inquiry by the Military Prosecutor, formal investigations with a view to
disciplinary measures being taken against the military personnel allegedly
involved in the death of a person had been discontinued.
90. On 29 october 1986 the Special Rapporteur addressed a letter to the
Government of Colombia in which, in the light of the report of the
investigation of the incident of 6 and 7 November 1985 at the Supreme Court,
he requested information on what action, if any, the Government had taken
against those responsible.
91. In the same letter the Special Rapporteur referred to allegations of the
killing of several hundred Colombians (including over 350 in Call) in the
period January—June 1986, the perpetrators of which were alleged to be members
of the regular armed forces, police and unidentified armed men. In addition,
13 cases of alleged summary or arbitrary executions, which occurred between
March and April 1986, were transmitted. The involvement of security forces or
of persons under the control of security forces was implied in those deaths.
The victims were said to be from various political and social groups.
92. The Special Rapporteur requested detailed information on the deaths
reported, including the circumstances in which they had occurred, whether any
investigations had been carried out to establish responsibility and what
action, if any, the Government had taken against those responsible.
93. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of Colombia to. the letter of 29 October 1986.
El Salvador
94. On 9 June 1986 a letter was addressed to the Government of El Salvador
transmitting the following allegations: during 1985 and the early months of
1986 alleged forced disappearances and summary or arbitrary executions of
civilians continued to be reported in El Salvador; the alleged victims were
mainly trade—union activists, but cases of students and workers were also
reported; the abductions and killings were mostly carried out by men wearing
plainclothes, suspected of belonging to “death squads”, believed to consist of
security personnel acting under the orders of military officers.
95. The Special Rapporteur, referring to article 6, paragraph 1, of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, requested information on
the safeguards, either legal or administrative, envisaged to protect the right
E/CN.4/1987/20
page 15
to life, in particular the measures taken under the law to determine the
identity of the perpetrators and the procedure for bringing such persons to
trial.
96. On 29 October 1986 a letter was addressed to the Government of
lu Salvador transmitting several new cases of alleged killings during 1986
carried out by members of the armed forces, as well as killings by
paramilitary groups who were said to have been armed and assisted by members
of the armed forces.
97. The Special Rapporteur, referring to article 6, paragraph 1, of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the United Nations
Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, requested information on the
measures taken by the Government and, in particular, detailed information on
the deaths reported, including the circumstances in which they had occurred,
on the relevant investigations and on the action, if any, taken by the
Government against those responsible.
98. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of El Salvadpr.
Ethiopia
99. On 29 october 1986 a letter was addressed to the Government of Ethiopia
transmitting allegations concerning executions of prisoners without a trial,
including those of 15 alleged members of the Eritrean People's Liberation
Front (EPLF) in January 1985 and several others in October 1985. Similarly,
some 40 prisoners held for alleged links with the Oromo Liberation Front (OLE)
were executed without trial on 10 and 16 February 1985.
100. The Special Rapporteur, referring to article 6, paragraph 1, and article
14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Eights, requested
information on the legal basis upon which such executions were carried out.
101, At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of Ethiopia.
Guatemala
102. On 9 June 1986 a letter was addressed to the Government of Guatemala
transmitting the allegation that during the second half of 1985 reports
continued to be received on cases of alleged summary or arbitrary executions
in Guatemala, Host of the victims had been shot dead by unidentified men
alleged to be linked to the security forces or abducted without trace. In
addition, after the election of the civilian Government, in December 1985,
several other cases of alleged summary or arbitrary executions had reportedly
occurred.
103. The Special Rapporteur, referring to article 6, paragraph 1, of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, requested information on
the legal or administrative safeguards envisaged to protect the right to life,
in particular the measures taken under the law to determine the identity of
the perpetrators and the procedure for bringing such persons to trial.
E/CN.4/1987/20
page 16
104. On za october 1986 the Permanent Representative of Guatemala to the
United Nations Of Eice at Geneva handed the Special Rapporteur a copy oE the
Supreme Court decision of 30 May 1986 designating an investigating judge to
investigate cases of missing persons and habeas corpus petitions filed by
non—governmental groups on behalf of the missing persons, as well as a number
of decisions and actions taken by the judiciary and a report of the judicial
investigation. The Special Rapporteur was also provided with the text of the
Law of the Congressional Commission on Human Rights.
105. The Permanent Representative also explained the difficulties encountered
by his Government, for example:
(a) Lack of co—operation from families of missing persons or persons
allegedly kiLled, for fear of reprisals if they give any inEormation to the
authorities, including the investigating judges. The judge therefore lacks
the. information to enable him to take the necessary action;
(b) When the new Government took over, the police force had only
20 patrol cars in running order throughout the country. Over 200 patrol cars
were not in running order. The police force therefore lacked the capacity,
the means and the organization to investigate all cases of killings.
Cc) Former members of the armed forces, belonging to either the extreme
right or the extreme left 1 are at large and want to destabilize the Government.
106. During the same meeting the Special Rapporteur transmitted to the
Permanent Representative a list of 47 additional cases of alleged killing,
which reportedly occurred between March and April 1986 and requested
information on those cases. The Permanent Representative was to communicate
that information to his Government for further investigation.
India
107. On 9 June 1985 a letter was addressed to the Government of India stating
that during 1985 several persons were reported to have died while in police
custody in various states. It was further alleged that the authorities had
not conducted an inquest on some of those cases. In addition, in nearly all
cases, there had been insufficient evidence to prosecute and convict the
police officials responsible. It was further reported that the Supreme Court
of India had drawn attention to the lack of effective prosecution of police
officers responsible in cases of death in custody, which had led to a proposal
made on 14 June 1985 by the Law Commission of India to amend the Evidence Act.
108. The Special Rapporteur, referring to article 7 of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention against Torture and
Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the
United t4ations Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Of ficials, requested
information on the safeguards envisaged and applied to prevent deaths in
detention, in particular, on the measures taken under the law to determine the
identity of the perpetrators and the procedure for bringing such persons to
trial.
109. On 30 October 1986 a representative of the Government of India visited
the Special Rapporteur and handed him a note concerning the alleged deaths in
custody. According to the note, a police officer is authorized, under law, to
page 17
use only the minimum force required to deal with a particular situatiOn. The
law does not grant power to cause the death of a person in the tours 8 of
arrest by a police officer, even if he is resisting or evading arrest, except
in the case of a person accused of an offence punishable by death or
life—imprisonment. Any illegal use of force is subject to inquiry and severe
punishment if the police officer is found responsible. It was further stated
that, in the case of death in police custody, an independent inquiry by a
magistrate into the cause of death was required (sect. 176 of the Indian Code
of Criminal Procedure). In that regard the National Police Commission was
said to have recommended, that a mandatory judicial inquiry be carried ?ttt in
respect of certain categories of complaints, including (i) death or grievous
injury caused while in police custody and (ii) deaths of two or more persons
arising from police action in the dispersal of an unlawful assembly.
110. The note also provided information on orte of the cases transmitted the
Special Rapporteur, according to which inquest proceedings on the death tn
polici custody had concluded that there was no indication of involvement of
the investigation agency. An independent inquiry by a magistrate was said to
have supported that conclusion.
ill , On 8 January 1987 representatives of the Government of India again
visited the Special Rapporteur and handed him a note concerning another of the
cases transmitted by the Special Rapporteur, concerning a person who was shot
by the police while offering armed resistance to arrest and after saVing
injured three police officers, two of whom died later. The person died
six days later in hospital after an operation.
Indonesia .
112. On 9 June 1986 a letter was addressed to the Government of Indonesia
about several persons who were alleged to have been killed while in the
custody of the police in 1985, after being arrested in connection with
T i criminal offences.
113. The Special Rapporteur, referring to article 7 of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention against Torture and
Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the
United Nations Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, requested
information on the safeguards envisaged and applied to prevent deaths in
detention, in particular, on the measures taken under the law to determine the
identity of the perpetrators and the procedure f or bringing them to trial.
114. On 30 October 1986 the Permanent Representative of Indonesia to the
United Nations Of Lice at Geneva visited the Special Rapporteur and handed him
a note stating that, in one case, three persons had been killed while offering
armed resistance to arrest and after a warning shot had been fired; with
regard to the second incident, the person had died as a result of the serious
injury inflicted upon him by an angry mob.
Iran (Islamic Republic of )
115. On 9 June 1986 a letter was addressed to the Government of the Islamic
Republic of Iran stating that several hundred persons had been executed in
various areas of the country during the second half of 1985 and earlY 1986;
many of the executions were said to have been carried out in secret, and the
perpetrators included prison personnel and “Pasdaran” (revolutionary guards).
Over 300 cases of alleged summary or arbitrary executions, as reported to the
Special Rapporteur, were described as well as other instances of summary
killings.
116. The Special Rapporteur, referring to articles 6, paragraph 1, and 14 of
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, requested
U information on the legal basis upon which executions were carried out.
117. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
i .ii . from the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Iraq
118. On 29 October 1986 a letter was addressed to the Government of Iraq
stating that, in September and October 1985, in northern Iraq approximately
200 persons said to be Kurds had been killed; some were said to have been
executed without trial, others killed during demonstrations and others to have
died as a result of torture by security forces. Furthermore, during 1986, two
executions allegedly took place, also in northern Iraq.
119. The Special Rapporteur, referring to articles 6, paragraphs 1, 7 and l'i
of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the
United Nations Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, requested
detailed information on the deaths reported, including the circumstances in
which they had occurred, whether any investigations had been carried out to
; establish responsibility and what action, if any, the Government had taken
against those responsible.
120. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of Iraq.
Liberia
121. On 9 June 1986, a letter was addressed to the Government of Liberia
referring to the death of some 600 persons killed by Government forces without
legal proceedings following an attempted coup d'4tat . The victims were mostly
innocent civilians but included some military. It was alleged that the
killings had in some cases been accompanied by acts of savage brutality,
including castration, mutilation and dismemberment. Among the civilian
victims, it was alleged that Charles Gbenyan, Chief Editor of the State
Television Station, had been killed at the Presidential Palace in Monrovia.
122. The Special Rapporteur, referring to article 6, paragraph 1, of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the United Nations
Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, requested information on
regulations and practices regarding the conduct of law enforcement agents and
troops including conduct during times of emergency, to ensure adequate
protection of the right to life of individuals.
123. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of Liberia.
E/CN.4/1987/20
page 18
E/CN .4/1987/20
page 19
Nicaragua
124. On 9 June 1986 a letter was addressed to the Government of Nicaragua
referring to the case of a farmer, who had been arrested at his home by the
police together with a relative in November 1985, and who had been found dead
shortly thereafter in the vicinity.
125. The Special Rapporteur, referring to article 6, paragraph 1, of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the United Nations
Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, requested information on
regulations and practices regarding the conduct of law enforcement agents and
troops to ensure adequate protection of the right to life of individuals.
126. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of Nicaragua.
Pakistan
127. On 9 June 1985 a letter was addressed to the Government of Pakistan
transmitting allegations that, since December 1985, a number of persons had
been sentenced to death by special military courts in various parts of the
country. It was alleged that the procedures of the court had not provided
certain legal safeguards to protect the defendants, such as the right to have
adequate time and facilities for the preparation of their defence and to
coitununicate with counsel of their own choosing and, in particular, the right
to appeal to a higher court. Furthermore, pre—trial investigations by the
police and the prosecuting authorities were said to have been biased.
Thirty cases of death sentences by the Special Military Court were given by
way of illustration.
128. The Special Rapporteur, referring to article 14, paragraphs 1, 3 (b) and
(g) and 5, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
requested information on these allegations.
129. On 16 October 1985 a reply was received from the Permanent Mission of
Pakistan to the United Nations Of f ice at Geneva denying that, in some cases
tried by the Military Courts, the safeguards in question had not functioned
:1 adequately or had not been provided by the procedures of the court. In
particular it was pointed out that the decisions of the Military Courts at
different levels were subject to review by qualified legal officers, and that
sentences handed down by the Military Court were subject to petition to the
Provincial Governor or to the Head of State. It was further stated that the
Military Court consisted of three members, including a civilian magistrate and
that a death sentence could be given only with the unanimous agreement of the
three members of the Court. Martial Law had been lifted on 30 December 1985,
and the Military Courts had been abolished at that time; cases pending before
those Courts had been transferred to the ordinary criminal courts , The reply
gave details in regard to the cases transmitted by the Special Rapporteur,
most of which were the subject of petitions for clemency.
Panama
130. On 9 June 1986 a letter was addressed to the Government of Panama
referring to the case of a former Vice—Minister of Health, who had been
detained on 13 September 1985 in front of numerous witnesses by members of the
— . .
E/CN.4/1987 120
page 20
Panamanian security forces, as he crossed the border from Costa Rica to
Panama, and whose decapitated body, bearing marks of torture, was found in
Costa Rica, just over the border from Panama, a few days later.
131. The Special Rapporteur, referring to article 6, paragraph 1, of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Eights and the United Nations
Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, requested information on
regulations and practices regarding the conduct of law enforcement agents and
troops to ensure adequate protection of the right to life of individuals.
132. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of Panama.
Paraguay
133 On 29 october 1986 a letter was addressed to the Government of Paraguay
referring to the case, which occurred in April 1986, of a student, who died
after having been beaten by men in plain clothes outside the Estado Mayor
(Army High Command) and the Regimiento Escolta Presidencial (Presidential
Guard Regiment) in Asuncion Police report' have attributed the death to
injuries sustained in a road accident; however, a preliminary autopsy
revealed evidence of torture and a 22—calibre bullet wound an the head
1 1 1 134. The Special Rapporteur, referring to article 6, paragraph 1, of the
International Covenant on Civil and olttacal Rights, requested detailed
information on the case, including the circumstances in which this death
occurred, whether any investigation had been carried out to establish
responsibility and what action, if any, the Government had taken against those
responsible.
135. On 5 December 1986 a reply was received from the Permanent Representative
of Paraguay to the United Flations Office at Geneva explaining that the case
was under judicial investigation and that further information would be
communicated as it became available.
. .
Peru
136 On 9 June 1986 a letter was addressed to the Government of Peru stating
that a military unit had killed 63 persons, including 35 children, in the
towns of Umaru and Bellavista, on 27 August 1985, after forcibly removing them
from their homes. They were buried in mass graves 1 which had been traced by a
parliamentary fact—finding Commission whose report had been made available to
the Special Rapporteur
13?. The Special Rapporteur, referring to article 6, paragraph 1, of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the United Nations
Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Of ficials, requested information on
regulations and practices regarding the conduct of law enforcement agents and
! . troops to ensure adequate protection of the right to life of individuals.
H: 138. On 5 september 1986 a reply was received from the Permanent
Representative of Peru stating that charges had been filed with the Examining
Magistrate of Cangallo against the Military and Political Chief of the
g/CN .4 11987/20
pag& 21
Emergency Sub—Zone, stationed in Cangallo, for off ences against the life,
person and health (homicide) of settlers in Umaru, T3ellavista and neighbouring
areas and that a full inquiry was being undertaken.
139. On 10 December 1986 a further reply was received from the Permanent
Representative of Peru, transmitting information, as requested, on existing
rules governing the conduct of members of the forces and law enforcement
agencies.
140. The Permanent Mission of Peru to the United Nations Office at Geneva also
sent several letters to the Special Rapporteur transmitting 0 mt1niqu 5 and
statements containing information on developments concerning the events that
took place in the prisons of Front6n, Lurigancho and Santa u&rbara, in Lime on
18 and 19 June 1986, as a result of a prison mutiny and subsequent
intervention of the armed forces, resulting in the death of some 200 persons.
In view of the allegation that excessive force might have been Used in
quelling the mutiny, the Government had ordered the Armed Forces Joint Command
to instruct the military courts to conduct an investigation. The Legislature
and the Government Attorney were also requested to investigate the events.
The President of the Republic said, in a statement on 24 June 1986, that he
had given instructions for commanders, officers and troops of the Republican
Guard who had killed prisoners after their surrender to be impri50t d and
brought to trial. It was subsequently reported that 15 officers and
80 soldiers of the Republican Guard had been detained pending trial.
141. The Permanent Mission of Peru to the United Nations Office at Geneva also
informed the Special Rapporteur of two decisions by the Governwent, dated
6 September 1986, abolishing the Commission of Peace and 8 lishing the
National Council of Human Rights.
142. On 22 December 1986, the Permanent Representative of Peru transmitted
Ministerial Decision No. 320,l—86JUS, issued by the Minister of Justice on
5 December 1986, establishing the Regulations of Organization and Functions of
the National Council of Human Rights.
143. Furthermore, on 11 November 1986 a letter as addressed to the Government
of Peru referring to the killing on 17 September 1986 of 11 campesinos and two
unidentified persons, presumably militants from Sendero Luminos o who were
alleged to have been killed by “sinchis” (members of the anti_terrorist unit
of the Guardia Civil).
144. The Special Rapporteur, referring to article 6, paragraph i, of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the united Nations
Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, requested detailed information
on the deaths reported, including the circumstances in which theY had
occurred, whether any investigations had been carried out to establish
responsibility and what action, if any, the Government had taken against those
responsible.
145. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of Peru.
ii nes
146, On 9 June 1986 a letter was addressed to the Government of
the Phtlappjnes stating that in 1985 over 700 persons were reported to have
- ‘
EJCN.4/ 1987/20
page 22
been killed by military and paramilitary groups under the command of the
regular army in various parts of the Philippines, and, in particular, on the
island of Mindanao. The victims were said to come from to a wide range of
backgrounds and were either summarily shot dead or found dead after having
been arrested or abducted.
1 147. The Special Rapporteur, referring to article 6, paragraph 1, of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the United Nations
Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, requested information on
regulations and practices regarding the conduct of law enforcement agents and
troops to ensure adequate protection of the right to life of individuals.
148. On 14 November 1986 a reply was received from the Permanent Mission of
the Philippines to the United Nations Office at Geneva stating that a
Presidential Committee on Human Rights (PCI-CR), established in May 1986, had
examined the cases transmitted by the Special Rapporteur, a number of which
were before the Committee. An additional 96 cases were provided by the
Committee, which had created fact—finding teams to investigate allegations of
summary or arbitrary executions and the President had issued an order
regulating the training and education of law enforcement personnel on the
subject of human rights. The Special Rapporteur was informed that the results
of the investigations as well as further measures for upholding human rights
: f would be furnished to him as soon as they were available.
South Africa
149. On 25 July 1986 a letter was addressed to the Government of South Africa
referring to the large number of deaths that were reported in 1985 and in the
first half of 1986, mainly in the black townships. OEe letter stressed the
apparent escalation in the number of deaths, in particular after the
declaration of the state of emergency on 12 June 1986 when numerous deaths
were attributed to “unrest—related incidents”. Moreover a considerable
proportion of these deaths had occurred during the state of emergency between
20 July 1985 and 7 March 1986 , The deaths were due to a number of causes, but
, were mainly the result of action by security forces, clashes between rival
groups of the black population, shooting during demonstrations and arbitrary
attacks, such as beating, petrol—bomb attacks on houses and “necklacing” by
, armed groups of so—called “vigilantes' and by unorganized mobs The letter
stated that 41 per cent of the deaths in May 1986 were allegedly by the result
of violence between black groups and 22 per cent were allegedly due to the use
of force by security forces. Reference was made to “unrest” in black
townships, such as Alexandra in February 1986 and Crossroads at the end of
May/beginning of June 1986; 22 persons were reported to have died in
; Alexandra and 44 deaths were reported at Crossroads , In this context,
reference was made to activities of so—called “vigilantes” who allegedly
enjoyed the support or acquiescence of the security forces, involving attacks
on houses belonging to anti—apartheid activists and “necklacing”.
I , :
150. On 31 October 1986 another letter was addressed to the Government of
South Africa in which the Special Rapporteur, referring to his letter of
25 July 1986, stated that information had continued to reach him of further
instances resulting in the death of several persons. By the same letter, the
Special Rapporteur transmitted a number of allegations and reiterated his
request for information on the measures taken by the Government to ensure
adequate protection of the right to life of the individual. The letter stated
- )
EICFL 4/1987/20
page 23
that, from the declaration of the state of emergency on 12 June until the end
of October 1986, over 300 persons had died in numerous incidents of unrest in
black townships as a result of clashes between tribal factions and
intervention by security forces, such as the one in Soweto on
26/27 August 1986 Where 21 persons had died when the authorities had tried to
evict tenants who had organized a rent boycott.
151. The Special Rapporteur requested detailed information on the deaths
reported, including the circumstances in which they had occurred, whether any
investigations had been carried out to establish responsibility and what
action, if any, the Government had taken against those responsible.
152. In his letters, the Special Rapporteur referred to regulation 16 of the
Regulations in terms of the Public Safety Act, 1953, which grants immunity to
officials for “any act in good faith ... ordered ... or performed by any
person in the carrying out of his duties or the exercise of his powers or the
performance of his functions”; regulation 3 which empowers a member of a
Force to make arrests without a warrant and to detain persons incommunicado
for prolonged periods; regulation 10 which prohibits “any subversive
statement”; as well as subsequent orders to prohibit free reporting of the
media on incidents of unrest, Special attention was drawn to two bills which
were awaiting enactment, namely the Public Safety P oeendment Act and the
Internal Security Amendment Act.
153. The Special Rapporteur requested detailed information on the deaths
reported, including the circumstances in which they had occurred, whether any
investigations had been carried out to establish responsibility and what
action, if any, the Government had taken against those responsible.
154. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of South Africa .
Sri Lanka .
155. On 7 January 1987 the representative of Sri Lanka visited the
Special Rapporteur and handed him an aide—m&noire on the continuing situation
of civil strife, in which several civilians were killed by either the security
forces or armed opposition groups, and on the recent developments in Sri Lanka.
156. According to the aide—mSoire, although negotiations for a political
solution had been held between the Government and Tamil groups through the
good offices of the Government of India, no agreement had been reached. It
was also stated that a Commission for the Elimination of Discrimination and
Monitoring of Fundamental Rights had been established to complement existing
institutions, such as the Supreme Court and the ombudsman, in ensuring redress
for violations of fundamental rights in a less formal manner. To carry out
its functions of investigation of alleged dicriminatory acts and of complaint
handling and conciliation in relation to discriminatory acts, the Commission
had been vested with the power to issue summonses and receive evidence, the
Commission was also entrusted with taking such action as might be directed by
the Supreme Court on any matter relating to a petition filed before the
Supreme Court, and tracing the whereabouts of missing persons. Furthermore
the aide—rnSoire described “terrorist violence”, which was stated to have
claimed the lives of 221 members of the security forces and 638 civilians
during the period from 1 January to 27 November 1986. It also stated that,
under such
-
E/CN.4/1987/20
page 24
circumstances, inaccurate or false allegations of killings and disappearances
were made against the Government. Finally it stressed that, in Sri Lanka the
domestic judicial process was available to seek legal redress, including
habeas corpus proceedings.
157. In addition, the following documents were attached to the aide—m&moire:
the statement of the President of Sri Lanka to the Political Parties'
Conference on 25 June 1986, announcing proposals for the devolution of power
LI I to Provincial Councils; an explanatory note on the Commission for the
Elimination of Discrimination and Monitoring of Fundamental Rights; and the
inquest report of 22 January 1986 concerning the death of nine persons on
5 January 1985 at Vankalai Church premises in Mat-mar.
158. During the visit the Special Rapporteur inquired about incidents of
killing by security forces which allegedly took place in 1986, in particular
an incident in which 12 passengers at the Kilinochchi railway station were
killed on 25 January 1986 and another incident in which some 60 persons were
killed at lJdumankulam, Amparai District, on 19 February 1986.
159, On 9 January 1987 the Special Rapporteur received a reply providing
details of what happened regarding the two incidents. The Special Rapporteur
was informed that the findings of the High Court and the Attorney General
regarding the two incidents would be conveyed to him as soon as possible.
Venezuela
160. On 29 October 1986 a letter was addressed to the Government of Venezuela
3tating that the Special Rapporteur had received information according to
which, on 8 May 1986, members of the security forces had killed nine civilians
near the village of Yutnare, state of Yaracuy; whereas it was originally
reported that these persons had died during a confrontation with the security
forces, it. was subsequently alleged, on the basis of certain indications, that
the victims had been shot dead without showing any resistance to the security
: personnel The matter was being handled by the military courts
161. The Special Rapporteur, referring to article 6, paragraph 1, of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the United Nations
Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, requested detailed information
on the deaths reported, including the circumstances in which they had
occurred, whether any investigations had been carried out to establish
responsibility and what action, if any, the Government had taken against those
responsible, as well as any further developments since the case had been
transferred to military jurisdiction.
162. On 22 December 1986, the Permanent Representative a.i. of Venezuela to
the United Nations Office at Geneva transmitted his Government's reply,
reaffirming its absolute respect for the right to life and recalling the
constitutional protection of that right. The reply explained that the
allegations transmitted by the Special Rapporteur reflected incidents that had
occurred as a result of the activities of armed groups, resulting in the
I : ; deaths reported by the Special Rapporteur and serious injury to the commander
of the security forces involved. Subsequent discoveries of weapons, military
material and other evidence had confirmed political ties between the group
concerned and similar groups in Colombia. The matter had been given wide
publicity as had the investigation subsequently conducted by the appropriate
E/CN. 4/1987/20
page 25
executive authorities. The Government was convinced that the appropriate
constitutional principles and legal safeguards had. been observed in the matter.
163. On 9 January 1987 the Permanent Representative of Venezuela to the
united Nations Office at Geneva visited the Special Rapporteur concerning the
alleged incident described in paragraph 160 , The Special Rapporteur,
expressing his appreciation for the Governments reply, further requested
information on the current status of the investigation by the judicial
authorities of the above—mentioned incident and also on the machinery and
rules of procedure for such an investigation.
Zimbabwe
164. On 29 October 1986 a letter was addressed to the Government of Zimbabwe
concerning a number of alleged cases of death in detention as a result of
torture and giving details of three such cases.
165. The Special Rapporteur, referring to article ? of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention against Torture and
Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the
United flations Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, requested
information on measures taken by the Government to ensure adequate protection
of the right to life of the individual, in particular detailed information on
the deaths reported, including the circumstances in which they had occurred,
whether any investigations had been carried out to establish responsibility
and what action, if any, the Government had taken against those responsible.
166. At the time of preparation of this report, no reply had been received
from the Government of Zimbabwe.
E/CN.4/1987/20
page 26
III, ANALYSIS OF PHENOMENA
167. In his last report (EICN.4/1986/21, chap. III), the Special Rapporteur
described three particular types of situation in which summary or arbitrary
executions were reported to have taken place most frequently, and called for
particular attention to these “acute phenomena”.
168. These three types of situation were: (a) killings in situations of
internal armed conflict; (b) killings by excessive or illegal use of force by
law enforcement agents; and Cc) deaths in custody.
169. The information received by the Special Rapporteur during the period
covered by his present mandate indicates that these three types of situation
continue to exist to an alarming extent, and he' therefore wishes to reiterate
what he said earlier on that subject.
170. In the present report, he further analyses two issues which form an
essential part of the phenomenon of summary or arbitrary executions and which
have emerged upon examination of the allegations received by the
Special Rapporteur. they are: (a) the absence of investigation, prosecution
and/or punishment in cases of death in suspicious circumstances; and
(b) death sentences passed after a trial without adequate safeguards to
protect the right tolife. Furthermore, he also analyses the situation in a
number of countries where newly established Governments have publicly pledged
their commitment to human rights.
A. Absence of investigation, prosecution and/or punishment in
cases of death in suspicious circumstances
171. In his last report (E/CN,4/l986/2l, para. 209), the Special Rapporteur
stated that “one of the ways in which Governments can show that they want this
abhorrent phenomenon of arbitrary or summary executions eliminated is by
investigating, holding inquests, prosecuting and punishing those found
guilty.” In carrying out his current mandate, therefore, he has made a point
of linking the allegations received to the relevant provisions of the
international instruments concerned and specifically requesting information on
the measures taken to investigate and establish responsibility for the alleged
death. Where national legislation was the subject of the allegations
received, information has been requested on its consistency with the
fundamental national law and/or international instruments.
172. Most countries have legal, judicial and administrative systems for
investigating the cause of death in unnatural, unusual or suspicious
circumstances. In some countries whenever an unnatural death occurs, the law
requires that a report be made to the nearest coroner. In other countries an
autopsy is ordered by the examining magistrate for the purpose of determining
the cause of death and prosecuting the culprits. In some countries, after the
initial investigation by the police, the magistrate may hold an inquest and,
if he is of the opinion that there is prima facie evidence to hold a person
responsible for the death, may recommend that such a person be prosecuted. In
all countries murder is a penal offence and anyone who has committed murder
may be charged and convicted.
173. In cases where an ordinary civilian was responsible for such deaths, the
foregoing legal and judicial procedures have been used, the circumstances have
E/CN.4/l987/20
page 27
been investigated, an autopsy carried out and those found responsible for the
death have been tried, convicted and punished in accordance with the law.
174. However, where death was caused by the police, the army or other law
enforcement agencies or persons acting under their protection, such
investigations have been the exception rather than the rule. Governments have
been noticeably reluctant to carry out investigations in such circumstances,
despite the availability of witnesses, and to punish the offenders, as the
examples given in the following paragraphs will show (see also
E/CN.4/1983/16, pares. 224 and 230 (4)). This has been due either to lack of
the political will or the capacity to investigate such deaths, or to the fact
that such deaths have been carried out pursuant to the policy of the
. . Government or with its express or implied permission or approval.
175. Where the military or law enforcement authorities reported that persons
were killed in confrontation between government forces and armed opposition
groups, such reports were, in some cases, accepted without further question or
investigation.
176. In cases of death caused by excessive or illegal use of force by law
enforcement officials or by the military authorities during arrest or
detention, the explanation often given by the authorities concerned was that
the criminal suspects were shot while trying to escape or when resisting
arrest, or in armed clashes in which law enforcement officials acted in
self—defence, or that persons in the custody of the police or military
authorities committed suicide or died of a sudden illness. Such explanations
were often accepted without further investigation even when they were not
supported by evidence, including autopsy reports. In cases where there was an
investigation, it was often carried out by the authorities to whom those
alleged to be responsible for such deaths were answerable.
177. It was not uncommon that autopsy or inquest proceedings were not held.
In cases where an autopsy was performed, the medical personnel in charge of
the autopsy were sometimes not protected against threat or pressure, which
made it all the more difficult for them to submit an objective and
comprehensive report. In fact there are several cases in which there was
independent evidence that the deceased had been severely tortured prior to his
death, but the autopsy or post—mortem report made no reference to the marks of
torture on the body.
178. In a number of countries, the investigating body, which was given an
independent or quasi—independent status from the other governmental
authorities, including the military or law enforcement authorities, did not,
in reality, secure its independence, or was prevented from carrying out a
thorough, independent investigation and prosecution.
179. In several other countries the Judiciary, whether civil or military, in
charge of directing the investigation, was not free from political pressure or
influence. The decisions of investigating judges who conducted inquiries into
cases of death were not sustained by higher courts, allegedly because of
political pressure.
ISO. In this context reference is made to the Special Rapporteur's last
report, in which he stated that there was a need to develop international
standards designed to ensure that investigations were conducted into all, cases
E/CN.4/ 1987/20
page 28
of suspicious death and in particular those at the hands of the law
enforcement agencies in all situations (E/Cfl.4/l986/21, para. 209). Reference
is also made to Economic and Social Council resolution 1986/36 on summary or
arbitrary executions, in paragraph 7 of which the Council took note of “the
need to develop international standards designed to ensure effective
legislation and other domestic measures so that proper investigations are
conducted by appropriate authorities into all cases of suspicious death,
including provisions for adequate autopsy” and to paragraph 8 of that
resolution in which the Special Rapporteur was invited to receive information
from appropriate United Nations agencies and other international organizations
F and to examine the elements to be included in such standards,
181. The Special Rapporteur is pleased to note that he has already received
suggestions concerning the elements to be included in such standards, and
although they are still under study and examination and it is too early to
elaborate on them, it is already clear that investigations to determine the
cause and manner of death should be:
(a) Carried out immediately following the discovery of such a death;
F :
(b) Carried out by an independent person(s) or authority whose
independence is guaranteed and protected from intimidation and
pressure;
Cc) Thorough; hence the person(s) or authority investigating should be
given the necessary powers and assistance to ensure that this is so,
Fr Cd) Impartial and effective,
Furthermore, the results of the investigation and autopsy should be public
documents accessible to members of the family of the deceased and the public
B. Death sentences passed after a trial without adequate
safeguards to protect the right to life
182 One of the persistent patterns of summary or arbitrary executions has
been the execution of those sentenced to death after a trial which did not
provide adequate safeguards to protect the right to life of the individual
As in previous years, the Special Rapporteur received information on cases of
such executions, both actual and imminent.
183. those safeguards designed to protect the rights of individuals on trial
[ H: are set out in article 14 of the Internationa l Covenant on Civil and Political
: Rights; they include the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent,
independent and impartial tribunal established by law, the right to be
F presumed innocent until proved guilty, the right to he informed of the charge
against oneself, the right to have adequate time and facilities for the
H preparation of one's defence and to communicate with counsel of one's own
choosing, the right to have legal assistance, the right to examine, or have
examined, the witnesses against one, the right not to be compelled to testify
against oneself or to confess guilt, the right to one's conviction and
sentence being reviewed by a higher tribunal according to law and the right
not to he tried or punished again for an offence for which one has been
finally convicted or acquitted.
E/CN.4/1987/20
page 29
184. In this regard , reference is made to the safeguards guaranteeing
protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty, contained in the
annex to Economic and Social Council resolution 1984/50, paragraph 5 of which
reads as folLows:
“Capital punishment may only be carried out pursuant to a final
judgement rendered by a competent court after legal process which gives
all possible safeguards to ensure a fair trial, at least equal to those
contained in article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, including the right of anyone suspected of or charged
with a crime for which capital punishment may be imposed to adequate
legal assistance at all stages of the proceedings.”
185. In view of the fact that the standards set forth in article 14 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights are reflected in the
overwhelming majority of national legislations, are referred to and accepted
in numerous resolutions and declarations of international bodies, and have
been specifically accepted by a substantial majority of the international
community through ratification of the Covenant, they have acquired the
character of customary international law binding on all States whether or not
they have ratified the Covenant.
186. According to information received, it was often special tribunals,
established outside the normal judiciary system, that were alleged to have
sentenced persons to death in a trial whose procedures did not guarantee the
rights of the accused as described above. The special tribunals included
State security courts, revolutionary courts, (special) martial law courts and
(special) military tribunals.
187. The subject of special tribunals in general has already been dealt with
in the Special Rapporteur's previous reports (for example, E/CN.4/1984/29,
para. 130; E/CN.4/l985/17, paras. 41—45).
188. In the present report, the Special Rapporteur wishes to refer, in
particular, to the question of the right to appeal and the right to seek
pardon or clemency. In a number of countries, there has been a remarkable
confusion of these two rights, more so in cases which are heard outside the
normal judicial systems and come before special tribunals or revolutionary
courts. In a number of countries, the right to seek clemency from the Head of
State or Council of State after being sentenced to death by a trial court or
tribunal has been taken as an appeal against the death sentence or its
equivalent.
189. In yet another situation, the Head of State has to confirm the death
sentence passed by a tribunal before it is carried out. The same Head of
State also has the right to grant pardon, remit, suspend or commute sentence
after he has exercised his right to confirm the death sentence. It has
therefore been argued that, when the Head of State is exercising his right to
confirm a death sentence, he is acting as an appellate tribunal and that
articles 14, paragraph 5, and 6, paragraph 4, of the Covenant have thus been
complied with. In the view of the Special Rapporteur, this is wrong.
190. Article 14, paragraph 5 of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights provides that “everyone convicted of a crime shall have the
right to his conviction and sentence being reviewed by a higher tribunal
according to law”.
E/CN.4/l987/20
page 30
191. The safeguards approved by the Economic and Social Council in
resolution 1984/50 state in paragraph 6 that “anyone sentenced to death shall
have the right to appeal to a court of higher jurisdiction, and steps should
be taken to ensure that such appeals shall become mandatory”.
192. In the great majority of countries the right to appeal to a higher
tribunal is recognized in criminal court procedures. The purpose of the
appellate system is to avoid and correct any error, whether substantial or
procedural, either on points of fact or law, which might occur in the process
of reaching a final judgement by the trial court in order to ensure fairness
and impartiality of the judgement and the administration of justice. In this
system the higher tribunal.may confirm, reverse or modify the judgement of the
lower court, or may even order a new trial. In cases involving the death
penalty the appellate system is of vital importance because of the nature of
the penalty.
193 , In accordance with article 14, paragraph 5, of the Covenant, a sentence
must be reviewed by a higher tribunal. This means that such a review cannot
be done by the same court as handed down the original sentence. It also means
that the review is not to be done by the executive branch of the Government,
including martial law authorities. OEe higher tribunal must be one
established under the judicial arm of the Government, enjoying an independent
status from the executive branch and manned by competent and impartial
persons. The experience of nations has proved that this system of judicial
review, when properly maintained and combined with the independence of the
judiciary, is the best way to ensure a fair and impartial application of the
law and to keep to a minimum any interference and pressure from the political
and/or security side.
194. Such judicial review is not to be confused with the system of pardon or .
commutation of sentence, including executive, review,
195 , Article 6, paragraph 4, of the Covenant provides that “anyone sentenced
to death shall have the right to seek pardon or commutation of the sentence.
Amnesty, pardon or commutation of the sentence of death may be granted in all
cases.”.
196. Once the death sentence is confirmed by the highest court, it may be
submitted, upon a petition Ear pardon or commutation, for review by the
executive authority vested with the power of pardon or commutation of
sentence. A pardon is an absolution of guilt, excusing a convicted person
from the penalty which has been imposed on him. Commutation of sentence is a
reduction of such penalty. Both are acts of clemency by the executive, which
often reflect considerations of mercy or even political expediency.
197. The right to appeal to a higher tribunal and the right to seek pardon are
two separate and distinct rights. As the Human Rights Committee established
under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights has stated in
paragraph 7 of its general comment 6 (16) on article & of the Covenant 3.1
concerning the death penalty,:
“The procedural guarantees therein prescribed must be observed,
including the right to a fair hearing by an independent tribunal, the
presumption of innocence, the minimum guarantees for the defence, and the
—
E/CU. 4/1987/20
page 3].
right to review by a higher tribunal. These rights are applicable in
addition to the particular right to seek pardon or commutation of the
sentence.”
C. Situations of restored or new democracies
198. During the past several years a number of countries where summary or
arbitrary executions had been widely alleged have gone through significant
political changes. Newly—established Governments in several countries have
publicly acknowledged the existence of serious human rights problems under the
previous governments and pledged their commitment to human rights. In some
coutitri s the • TieW Gov rnIIent has initiated investigations of human rights
violations committed under the previous Government. In other countries a
commission has been established by either the Legislature or the Executive to
) serve as a consultative body to review, recommend, advise and co—ordinate
human rights policies in general or propose legislation on human rights with a -
view to preventing a recurrence of serious violations of human rights.
199. In the following paragraphs different types of arrangements in four
countries, namely Guatemala, Peru, the Philippines and Uganda, are described.
In this connection, a special reference must be made to Argentina, which set
Up a commission to investigate the large number of disappearances in that
country and thus set the trend for the new developments that later
materialized in other countries.
200. In December 1983 in Argentina the newly—elected President ordered the
trial by the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces of the nine members of the
three military juntas that had ruled the country between 1976 and 1983, during
which period 6,000 to 9,000 people disappeared, as well as of other members of
the military who were charged with involvement in the anti—subversive
operations.
201. The Government also established, by Decree No. 187/83 of
15 December 1983, the National Commission on the Disappearance of Persons.
The mandate of the Commission was to receive complaints and evidence of
disappearances and transmit them to the courts if they related to the
commission of an offence. The Commission was empowered to investigate the
fate or whereabouts of missing persons. OEe investigating powers included
that of requesting information from official institutions, which were obliged
to provide it under penalty of law, and also that of entering official and
military premises to make inquiries concerning disappeared persons.
202. The Commission had 11 members appointed by the Government from all walks
of life and was assisted by five secretariats in Buenos Aires and four
delegations in other places in the country.
203. The mandate of the Commission was originally for six months but was
extended to nine months. It presented a final report to the President of the
Republic on 20 September 1984.
204. Despite the almost complete absence of collaboration by the military
authorities, the Commission collected 8,961 cases of missing persons during
its mandate, it gathered evidence from coroners and from the files in morgues,
mortuaries and crematoria and finally filed 80 cases before the courts
concerning i,o i individuals.
E/CN.4/1987/20
page 32
: 205. Ny Decree No. 3090 of September 1984, the Sub—Secretariat for
Human Rights was created within the Ministry of the Interior, which was to be
in charge of human rights matters, including disappearances.
206. In October 1984 the National Court of Appeals for Federal Criminal and
Correctional Cases decided to take over the proceedings from the
Supreme Council of the Armed Forces concerning the cases of the nine military
leaders. In December 1985 the Court delivered its verdict. Two of the, nine
were found guilty of homicide, illegal detention and other human rights
violations and were sentenced to life imprisonment; three were sentenced to
imprisonment ranging from 4 1/2 to 17 years and the remaining four were
acquitted
207. Trials of others who were indicted for their involvement in the
,,j disappearances continued during 1986
208. During the process of investigation, prosecution and trials, the
Government used existing rules of law and procedures rather than laws of
exception or ex post facto legislation.
I , ! Guatemala
209. In Guatemala, the Congressional Commission on Human Rights and the Office
of the Attorney for Human Rights were created by the Constitution (arts. 213,
274 and 275) in 1985. The terms of reference and powers of the Commission and
the Office of the Attorney for Human Rights were defined by law.
210 The mandate of the Commission is to promote, study, and propose
legislation on human rights. It is also to make recommendations to the
executive body, to liaise with international bodies, and to monitor the
implementation of the laws concerned. The Commission is to prepare a list of
candidates for nomination to the post of Attorney for Human Rights and to
transmit to the Congress the annual report of the Attorney for Human Rights.
211. The Commission consists of one deputy from each political party
represented in the Congtess
212. The Attorney for Human Rights is elected by the Congress for a five—year
term and has supreme authority regarding human rights matters within the
country. His mandate is to promote and co—ordinate efficient functioning of
administrative and judicial procedures, to recommend changes in administrative
practice, to condemn publicly acts or behaviour which violate constitutional
rights, and to receive complaints front any person and investigate cases of
human rights violations,
213. The Attorney for Human Rights is empowered in his investigations to have
access to official documents in the possession of officials, authorities and
institutions and to obtain their collaboration, to summon any person or public
official to appear before him personally, to demand that the authorities
dismiss or suspend any public official and to initiate legal proceedings
against any person, official or institution.
E/CN ,4/l987/20
page 33
Peru
214. In Peru in September 1985 a Peace Commission was set up as announced by
the newly—elected President. The Commission was an advisory and consultative
body of the Office of the President and was composed of six personalities
representing various sectors of society. Details of the functions of the
Commission were given in the Special Rapporteur's last report (E/CN.4/l986/21,
para. 129 (b)). One of its functions was to channel and bring before the
authorities complaints submitted regarding human rights violations involving
killings, extrajudicial executions, disappearances of persons, torture and
abuse of power by the authorities. It was also to advise the .President
regarding the enforcement of human rights.
215. The Commission of Peace was dissolved by the Government by
Supreme Resolution 265—86—JUS of 5 September 1986, and, by
Supreme Decree 012—86—JtJS of the same date, the National Council on
Human Rights was established.
216. The Council was set up within the Ministry of Justice to promote,
co—ordinate and consult with the executive body on protection of
human rights. It is composed of nine persons, namely, the Minister of Justice
as Chairman, representatives of the Ministries of Foreign Affairs, the
Interior and Education, representatives of the Catholic Church of Pent, the
Peruvian Universities, the National Federation of Bar Associations and a
representative of private human rights bodies.
217. The Council has an Executive Secretariat which implements the policies
and actions it decides upon. The Executive Secretary is nominated by a
supreme resolution, upon the recommendation of the Minister of Justice.
218. In order to fulfil its mandate, the Council is empowered to establish
commissions and working groups, to which administrative bodies are to give the
required support. The rules of procedure of the Council are to be approved by
the Minister of Justice.
219. By Ministerial resolution No. 32O.l—86—JUS of 5 December 1986, the
Minister of Justice issued the Regulations governing the organization and
Functions of the National Council of Human Rights. According to the
regulations, the functions of the Council are: to disseminate legal
instruments concerning human rights; to elaborate a human rights education
programme; to conduct research and study of the protection of human rights in
Peru; to make proposals concerning legislation on human rights and the
revision of existing laws; to deal with international organizations concerning
human rights and to disseminate information on action taken by Peru in regard
to the guarantee of the fundamental rights.
E jlippines
220. In the Philippines a Presidential Committee on Human Rights was created
by Executive Order No. 8 of 18 March 1986, The Committee, a purely advisory
and consultative body, is attached to the Office of the President and its
primary task is to assist the President in matters concerning human rights.
E/CN.4/19 87/20
page 34
221. The Committee is composed of seven persons representing various sectors
of society; including the Judge Advocate General of the Armed Forces.
222. The functions of the Committee include:
(a) Investigating cases of violation of human rights, past or present,
upon receipt of complaints or on its own initiative, or by assignment of the
President, committed by officers or agents of the Government or persons acting
under their control;
(b) Reporting its findings to the President and making them public with
-suggestions for action by. the Government;
(c) Proposing procedures and safeguards for the protection of human
rights.
223. The Committee is empowered to take testimonies and evidence under oath in
its investigations, to summon any person to appear, testify and to bring with
him or produce any documents before the Committee, including classified
official documents, to grant immunity from prosecution to any person in regard
to his testimony, to hold any person in contempt and to impose penalties, and
to call upon any executive body for assistance or reform.
224. By Memorandum Order No.20, the Ministry of National Defence, the New
Armed Forces of the Philippines, the Constabulary and the Integrated National
Police were directed to include the study of human rights as an integral and
indispensable part of the education and training of all police, military and
other personnel involved in carrying out arrests and investigations,
especially those in charge of detained and convicted prisoners.
225. The members of the Committee and its staff are granted Presidential
immunity when acting within their duties, functions, powers and authority
Uganda
226. In Uganda a Commission of Inquiry was established on 16 May 1986 by the
Minister of Justice under the Commission of Inquiry Act, in order to inquire
into all aspects of violation of human rights, breaches of the rule of law and
excessive abuses of power, committed against persons in Uganda by the r gimes
in power, their servants, agents or agencies during the period 9 October 1962
to 25 January 1986, and possible ways of preventing the recurrence of the
aforesaid acts, including, among others, inquiring into the causes and
circumstances surrounding the mass murders and all acts or omissions resulting
in the arbitrary deprivation of human life committed in various parts of
Uganda.
227. The Commission is composed of six persons nominated by the Minister of
Justice from all walks of life, including a Justice as Chairman.
228. The Commission is empowered to call such witnesses or ask for the
production of such evidence as it may deem necessary and to receive such
assistance from any person as it may think fit. The law of evidence is
applied in so far as is practicable.
E/CN. 4/1987/20
page 35
229. The Commission is to report to the Ministry of Justice and make
recommendations.
*
* *
230. The arrangements described in the foregoing paragraphs differ from one
another with regard to their composition, mandate and powers.
231. While all the mechanisms described above have advisory or consultative
functions,. three -of them.have powers .t.o .investigate..cases of violation of
human rights, including powers to summon witnesses and call for evidence under
penalty of law.
232. In addition to the establishment of a human rights body, some of the
Governments have undertaken a review of the security and police forces, their
reorganization, education and training with emphasis on respect for human
rights. In this regard, in a number of cases, technical or professional
advice as well as material assistance from outside is sought.
233. The outcome of the arrangements in those four countries has yet to be
seen. Although some of the newly—established bodies were reported to have
begun their work, no official report has so far been made available. In some
cases, they seem to have been confronted with certain difficulties. Moreover,
although an improvement is often noticeable, the general situation of human
rights in some countries remains precarious.
234. A number of Governments have indeed confirmed that they face difficulties
in their efforts to enhance their capacity to restore or raise the level of
respect for human rights, and in particular the right to life, such as:
(a) In establishing administrative structures or infrastructure which
have been destroyed or did not exist;
(b) In finding experienced and trained personnel, logistical support and
materials, the absence of which further prevents efficient functioning of the
investigatory bodies;
(c) In securing the co—operation of the security or police forces in the
investigation of cases of human rights violations allegedly involving their
personnel;
(d) In the continuing operation of the military outside the control of
the Government. In some countries human rights abuses by military personnel
continue to be reported even after the installation of the new Government;
Ce) In the existence of situations of internal conflict, in which armed
Opposition groups refuse to cease their guerrilla activities.
R/CN.4/1987/20
page 36 .
IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
235. As may be ascertained from the foregoing, implementation of the mandate
of the Special Rapporteur during the period covered by this report generated
increased activity compared with previous years. In addition to information
from numerous sources relevant to his mandate, the Special Rapporteur received
several allegations of impending executions that, it was alleged, might
constitute summary or arbitrary executions and required his urgent attention
and humanitarian intervention. The approach he has followed has been that of
past years; information relating to situations in which the right to life may
have-fl been -put in- jeopardy, was transmitted to the Governments concerned for
their comments with a request for information on actioii liaketi,if ny; and-- - -
cases considered prima facie to be urgent were communicated by cable to the
governments concerned.
236. As may be seen from chapter I above, these activities covered a wide
: ; range and in several instances brought about reactions from the authorities
H- concerned in the form of a reply or consultation, or both. Therefore the
first conclusion to be drawn is that the interest of Governments and other
[ H , parties in the mandate has continued to spread and this had led to a marked
corresponding increase in understanding the causes of the phenomenon of
summary or arbitrary executions. It is the hope of the Special Rapporteur
that this trend will continue towards an increasingly constructive approach to
solving the problems that lie at the root of this phenomenon. In other
instances however, particularly in matters of urgent appeals, reactions were
not as many or as prompt as the Special Rapporteur would have liked, although
in several cases he was able to ascertain from other sources that his appeal
had indeed been acted upon.
237. In two instances the Special Rapporteur was able to undertake specific
steps with a view to informing himself in greater detail of developments
relating to his mandate, namely the hearings held in Lusaka
from 4 to 16 August 1987 jointly with the Ad Hoc Working Group of Experts on
-‘ southern Africa and the visit to Uganda from 17 to 20 August 1987 in
connection with the activities of the Commission of Inquiry into Violations of
Human Rights which has been established by the Government pursuant to its
intention stated by the Foreign Minister to the Commission on Human Rights
in 1986.
238. This report illustrates the basic finding that the phenomenon of summary
or arbitrary executions persists in all regions; although the causes
identified in this and earlier reports have been several, the situation of
armed conflict in a number of countries has caused the largest loss of life of
persons not directly involved in such conflicts. In spite of existing
international norms designed to control the conduct of armed conflicts and the
repeated calls by international and regional bodies to parties to conflicts to
respect the right to life of innocent civilians, the loss of human life
continues to be considerable. In the opinion of the Special Rapporteur this
is due to a fundamental absence of understanding and respect for the right to
life among those responsible for the direction of military operations in such
conflicts.
_ .. ‘
. E/CM.4/1967/20
page 3?
239. A second principal cause of loss of life is attributable to
indiscriminate violence, such as that characterized by so—called “terrorism”,
the victims of which are very often innocent civilians. The period covered by
the present report has been marked by several such problems which again find
their source in a fundamental absence of respect for the right to life. It is
worth noting in this context that the phenomenon known as “terrorism's has led
in some cases to instances of reprisals or repression by organs of the State
which are responsible for order and security; in the opinion of the
Special Rapporteur an act of terrorism is one which has the effect of sowing
terror in the victim whoever the perpetrator may be. The commission of such
a ts by organs of State and Government should be prevented and suppressed by
those responsible for law and 5rdei iII thi s me ‘vigo l lr as is applied”when . .
such acts are committed by others. The Special Rapporteur has noted numerous
situations in which the right to life has suffered as a result of the illegal
and excessive use of force by law enforcement agents including, in certain
instances, officials responsible for the custody of detainees, Moreover, he
has noted with regret that a high percentage of such instances which were
drawn to his attention have simply not been investigated or inadequately
investigated.
: 240. A third principal cause of non—respect for the right to life is that
resulting from executions without trial or after a trial which does not afford
adequate safeguards to protect the accused. The Special Rapporteur has noted
that most of the cases which were the subject of urgent appeals come under
this category.
241. The Special Rapporteur has noted yet another principal cause which may
perhaps require more attention by the international community. In several
instances it is clear that the right to life is being violated on an ongoing
basis as a result of the inability of the authorities to control the group
‘, concerned and to enforce order and respect for the right to life. Countries
which were emerging from periods of non—democratic or authoritarian forms of
government were particularly exposed to this phenomenon.
242. The Special Rapporteur offers the following reflections and suggestions
concerning the foregoing.
243. With regard to the situation of internal armed conflict, the
Special Rapporteur referred in his last report (E/CN.4/l986/21, paras. 167 and
169) to the phenomenon of the polarization of the various groups of society in
situations of internal conflict, and the need to remove the causes which led
those groups to armed conflict, and stated that one of the ways of removing
the polarization was for the Government to embark on a genuine and deliberate
policy of national reconciliation. The Special Rapporteur is aware of various
efforts having been made by the Governments and opposition groups in a number
of countries and is following the outcome of such e.f forts with great interest.
244. Regarding deaths caused by illegal or excessive use of force by security,
law enforcement or other Government officials, the Special Rapporteur has
.: elaborated in this report (chap. III, Sect. A), on the absence of adequate
investigation of such deaths and confirmed the urgent need to develop
standards designed to ensure proper investigations into all cases of death in
suspicious circumstances. During the course of his present mandate, the
Special, Rapporteur has received some proposals on the procedures to be
followed in such investigations by the appropriate authorities, including
E/CN. 4/1987/20
page 38
provisions for autopsy, and related preventive measures to be taken by the
Government. Me would like to invite further suggestions and proposals in this
regard from Governments and organizations. The experience of Governments is
valuable and should be shared with the Special Rapporteur.
245. With regard to the death penalty pronounced after a trial in which the
guarantees for the rights of the accused were not fully observed, the
Special Rapporteur wishes to refer again to articles 6 and 14 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Economic and Social
Council resolution 1984/50 entitled “Safeguards guaranteeing protection of the
rights of those facing the death penalty” As is made clear in chapter III ,
section , of this report, the procedural guarantees elaborated in the anne6c
of the above mentioned resolution must be observed.
H j
246. In view of these conclusions, the Special Rapporteur would like to
present to the Commission the following recommendations:
(a) That Governments :
(i) Ratify international human rights instruments, such as the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, including
the Optional Protocol thereto, and the Convention against Torture
and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment;
4 (ii ) Review national laws and regulations with a view to strengthening
the preventive measures against deaths caused by illegal or
excessive use of force by security, law enforcement or other
government officials,
(iii) Review the machinery for investigation of deaths under suspicious
circumstances in order to secure an impartial, independent
investigation on such deaths, including an adequate autopsy;
(iv) Review the trial procedures of tribunals, including those of
special tribunals, in order to ensure that they embody adequate
safeguards to protect the rights of the accused in the trial
proceedings, as stipulated in the relevant international
instruments;
Cv) Emphasize the importance of the right to life in the training of
all law enforcement personnel and inculcate in them respect for
life;
(1) That international organizations :
Ci) Strengthen their co—ordination in dealing with the immediate
problems and the root causes of summary or arbitrary executions,
in particular by sharing information, publications, studies,
expertise, etc.;
(ii) make a concerted effort to draft international standards designed
to ensure proper investigation by appropriate authorities into
all cases of suspicious death, including provisions for adequate
autopsy.
E/CFL4/1987/20
page 39
247. In addition, Governments, individually and through the international
community, should support and encourage peace initiatives and political
solutions to situations of armed conflict. Also Governments should be
encouraged to take appropriate and effective measures, on national, regional
and international levels, to combat terrorism and/or terrorist acts.
248. Furthermore Governments should be encouraged to enter into bilateral or
regional agreements with a view to extending mutual assistance and
co—operation to enhance the capacity of their authorities to safeguard the
individual's right to life. At the international level, organs within the
Unit ed Nations system should undertake action with a view to assisting
Governments I I that wfll enable the authorities
concerned effectively to carry out their basic obligation to protect the right
to life of individuals in their societies.
249. In the view of the Special Rapporteur, this is the key to the solution of
the problem if the international community wishes to applY effective measures
to combat the kind of violations of the right to life described in this report.
Note
1.' official Records of th General Assembly , rty—seventh Session,
Supplement No. 40 (A/37/40), annex V.
E/CN. 4/1987/20
page 40
Annex I
JOINT HEARiNGS ON SOUTHERN AFRICA
(4 TO 15 AUGUST 1986)
1. It may be recalled that the Special Rapporteur, and the Chairman of the
Ad Hoc Working Group of Experts on southern Africa met in Lusaka, Zambia, for
joint hearings on southern Africa in November 1985, as described in the
Special Rapporteur's report to the Commission on Human Rights at its
forty—second session (E/CN.4/1986/21, para. 56).
2. In the light of IIe c:otitiJnubiisreports of deaths ia South Africa and
Namibia and the serious nature of the allegations of non—respect for the right
to life received by the Special Rapporteur since the above—mentioned joint
j hearings, it was decided by the Special Rapporteur and the Ad Hoc Working
Group of Experts that joint hearings should be held again in August 1986.
3. The joint hearings were conducted in Lusaka, Zambia, from
4 to 15 August 1986. Prior to the hearings invitations were sent to a number
of persons within and outside South Africa and Namibia who were believed to
have firsthand knowledge or experience concerning the situation of human
N rights in South Africa and Namibia
4. In spite of considerable difficulty resulting from the state of emergency
N ianposed on 9 June 1986 in South Africa, the Special Rapporteur and the
Working Group gathered information in the form of oral presentations and
written submissions
5 the Special Rapporteur took note of the information, especially regarding
deaths attributed to “unrest—related incidents', action by police and security
forces and activities by armed groups of so—called “vigilantes”. In this
context reference is made to the report of the Ad Hoc Working Group of Experts
on southern Africa (E/CN 4/1987/ ) In view of the continuing gravity of the
situation in South Africa in regard to the right to life, the
Special Rapporteur is of the opinion that further joint hearings or some
g similar exercise should be organized in order to observe closely the situation
in South Africa and Namibia and to report to the Commission on Human Rights on
any developments on the basis of up—to—date firsthand information.
E/CN ,4/1987 120
page 41
Annex II
VISIT TO UGANDA
(17 TO 20 AUGUST 1986)
1. It may be recalled that the Special Rapporteur addressed letters to the
Government of Uganda on 31 October 1984 and 25 July 1985 transmitting a
summary of allegations of violations of the right to life. No response having
been received, a reminder was sent on 19 June 1986, These allegations were
duly reflected in the report of the Special Rapporteur to the Commission on
Human Rights at its forty—second session (1986/21, paras. 94—95 and 142—143).
2. On 6 March 1986, His Excellency Mr. I. Mukiibi, Minister for Foreign
Affairs of Uganda, made a statement before the Commission on Human Rights in
which he announced the intention of his Government to establish a commission
of inquiry to look into violations of human rights in Uganda.
3. Accordingly, on 21 July 1986, the Special Rapporteur addressed a message
to the Minister for Foreign Affairs recalling his earlier correspondence with
the Government of Uganda and the Minister's statement as well as the
announcement of the establishment of this Commission of Inquiry in May 1986,
and proposing that he visit Uganda with a view to following up on the
allegations he had received and informing himself of the functions and work of
the Commission of Inquiry. OEe Special Rapporteur proposed “to meet
Government officials, members of the Commission, other individuals and groups
and to visit any areas relevant to the subject of his mandate”.
4. On 30 July 1986, the Government indicated its agreement with the visit of
the Special Rapporteur and proposed a programme of work on the lines suggested
by the Special Rapporteur.
5. The Special Rapporteur visited Uganda from 17 to 20 August 1986.
6. During his visit he met, among others, (a) Mr. I. Mukiibi, Minister for
Foreign Affairs, who outlined the background of the human rights situation in
Uganda before the current Government and explained the Government's policy of
respect for the rule of law and human rights and the reasons for the
establishment of the Commission of Inquiry into Violation of Human Rights;
(b) Justice w. Wombuzi, Chief Justice of Uganda, who observed that the current
Government was committed to promoting and maintaining the rule of law;
(c)Mr. P. Ssmogerere, Minister f or Internal Affairs, who described the efforts
made by the Ministry of InteL nal Affairs in the process of rehabilitation of
the country, in particular, concerning the review, recruitment and training of
a virtually new police force; (d) Mr. J. Mulenga, Minister of Justice/Attorney
General, who briefed the Special Rapporteur about steps and measures planned
by the authorities to deal with the allegations relating to non—respect of the
right to life and other human rights, the restoration of the rule of law, and
the reasons astablishing the Commission of Inquiry; (e) Justice A. Oder,
Chairman of the Commission of Inquiry, who explained about the Commission, in
particular its mandate, composition, procedure, staff, the problems it faced
and assistance required from the international community; (f) Mr. Kayondo,
President of the Ugandan Law Society, who explained the difficulties
experienced by lawyers in previous years and the changes under the present
Government. OEe Special Rapporteur also attended the inaugural session of the
Commission on Inquiry.
E/CN.4 11987/20
page 42
7. The Special Rapporteur also undertook a tout of the so—called Lowero
Triangle, an area stretching some 60 miles north and west of Kampala. The
purpose of the visit was to observe some of the sites to which reference had
been made in the allegations that he had transmitted to the Government of
Uganda in 1984 and 1985. Several conflicts were reported to have taken place
in this area during the preceding 15 to 20 years resulting in allegations of
serious violations of human rights. The Special Rapporteur met several
persons who said that they had witnessed incidents in which innocent civilians
had been killed, mostly in reprisals; he viewed numerous places where human
remains had been collected from surrounding areas, in evidence of massacres.
There is no doubt that there was systematic and massive destruction of human
flEe, a1YIiFe; Prdp&ty iii a ihidK some may describe
as being of genocidal proportions. This was indeed a sobering experience.
8. The Special Rapporteur conducted further consultations with the Secretary
of the Commission of Inquiry, Mr. B. Oluka, who set out the priority
requirements of the Commission as follows:
(a) Reading materials , in particular bibliographies and texts of publications
dealing with human rights violations and the prosecution of actions
constituting such of fences;
(b) Logistical support , in the form of:
(i) two Land Rovers to be used by its investigators, and
(ii) transport for the Chairman and the Commissioners to ensure their
mobility and security and make them less dependent; (it was
explained that, given the nature of the work of the Commission, a
certain degree of security risk was to be expected, although the
authorities assumed full responsibility therefore.)
Cc) Stationery of which there was widespread shortage in Uganda which could
prove a serious threat to the work of the Commission and its investigators;
Cd) Office machinery , in particular a photocopying machine, as well as
photographic equipment, including two cameras, film and printing paper.
9. The Special Rapporteur observed that years of internal conflict had
brought the country to a virtual halt in all sectors. Respect for the right
to life and other basic rights was non—existent. The judicial system was
paralysed. The police force was present only in name. The military had
become a law unto themselves and an instrument for repression whose objective
was the very opposite of protecting and defending the population. OEere had
been a complete breakdown of law and order. The material situation in the
country was obviously very serious and efforts were urgently required in all
areas of administration.
10. The Special Rapporteur noted that there was general agreement that the
current Government was fully committed to restoring peace in the country under
which the rule of law could prevail and human rights would be respected and
guaranteed. The National Resistance Army (NRA) had demonstrated its adherence
to those values when it was waging a guerrilla war against the then existing
governments. The N RA 10—point programme puts priority on the re—establishment
of respect for human rights. The population therefore appeared to be
E/CN.4/1987120
page 43
confident that the Government would ensure that human dignity was restored and
that the law which had been dormant for so long would again be applied.
11. The Government is having to start from scratch to build a new police
force. Thousands of members of the existing police force had either retired,
been dismissed or otherwise terminated, At the time of the mission, it was
intended to recruit 2,000 persons into the police force in September 1986 and
a further 2,000 persons in January 1987. The Police Department plays a very
important role in the process of restoring and respecting the rule of law.
Education and training of the police in aspects of human rights is crucial.
The Minister of the Interior specifically asked for international assistance
in- this-area; As the SpeciaLRapporteur hasIIad•occasionto recommend in the
past (E/CN.4/1985/17, para. 79 Cc)), Governments should set up training
programmes for law enforcement officials with emphasis on the provisions of
instruments such as the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Off icials, the
Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners and the Convention
against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment. The Special Rapporteur therefore hopes that the Commission will
find a way of assisting the Government of Uganda in this area.
12. The Commission of Inquiry needed expert advice on several aspects of its
work, particularly in regard to the definition of offences against human
rights and the legal problems that may be encountered in ensuring that justice
is done within the framework of the legal institutions and in accordance with
established principles of law.
13. In the course of his mission, the Special Rapporteur observed that no
progress whatsoever could be achieved unless certain clearly essential
requirements were met. For example, the investigative functions of the
Commission of Inquiry were paralysed without transport and office supplies,
including photographic equipment.
1 . The Special Rapporteur has had occasion to note that the situation in
Uganda has been the subject of examination in the context of the programme of
advisory services and that efforts have been made in recent years to establish
a programme of technical assistance in human rights. It would seem that these
efforts have so far not been successful and it is not clear at what stage such
plans may have been abandoned.
15. The Special Rapporteur expresses the hope that a programme of assistance
to Uganda can be incorporated in the context of the UNDP programme and for
that purpose he will make himself available to advise on the priorities in
regard to programmes envisaged to improve respect for human rights.
16. It is desirable and essential to maintain and strengthen links with the
Commission of Inquiry to ensure continuity in its work and to provide it with
the support that would minimize its logistical problems and enhance its
efficiency.
17. In the prevailing situation, where there are clear signs of a will to
give priority to re—establishing the rule of law, and given the immensity of
this task in a country which has been conditioned to absence of law and order,
the preparation of such a programme would appear to demand the most urgent
attention. It is for these reasons that the Special Rapporteur urges the
Commission on Human Rights to give its most serious attention to this matter
and to encourage rapid and effective implementation of a programme along the
lines described in this report.
