WRITTEN QUESTION E-2790/02

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(4 October 2002)

Subject: International convention against torture and abstention of USA

The USA recently refused to vote in favour of the new draft UN convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. This draft convention provides for the adoption of an international system of inspections of prisons so as to ensure that no torture takes place in them. The fact that the USA, a country which enjoys a special prestige internationally, abstained even in voting in the UN General Assembly constitutes a de facto weakening of the convention and also means that the convention is not binding for the USA.

Given that the USA, shortly after voting against the establishment of the International Criminal Court, is again refusing to ratify an international UN Convention, will the Council say how it views this development? What position does it intend to adopt vis-à-vis the convention? Does it intend to ensure that the convention is ratified by the candidate countries and to exercise maximum international diplomatic pressure to ensure that those States Parties of the UN that had either abstained or voted against the draft convention proceed to vote in favour of it in the General Assembly?

Reply

(20 February 2003)

The Council is not aware of the existence of a new draft UN convention against torture. The USA ratified the UN Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) on 1 October 1994.

A draft Optional Protocol to the CAT, providing for a preventive system of national and international inspections of places of detention, is currently going through the final stage of endorsement by the relevant UN bodies (the UN Commission on Human Rights (CHR), the Economic and Social Council (Ecosoc) and the UN General Assembly (UNGA)).

The proposal to strengthen the prevention of torture by an international visiting mechanism under the CAT has been consistently supported by the EU. The eradication of torture wherever it occurs is one of its priority concerns, as evidenced by the Council's adoption on 9 April 2001 of Guidelines for a EU policy towards third countries on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

The draft Optional Protocol has been the subject of negotiation for 10 years in a UN working group, and it became clear by the time of the 58th session of the CHR earlier this year that consensus on the text was not going to be reached. The chairperson of the working group therefore submitted a compromise text, which was put forward to CHR 58 in a draft resolution presented by Costa Rica, to which the draft Optional Protocol was annexed.

In this context, the EU made a determined and comprehensive effort for the adoption of the draft Optional Protocol, including several rounds of demarches in a large number of capitals, while the USA maintained its opposition to the adoption of the draft as tabled.

On 7 November 2002, the 3rd Committee of the UNGA adopted the draft Optional Protocol with 104 votes in favour, 8 against and 37 abstentions. The USA, Japan, Israel, Nigeria, Cuba, Syria, China and Vietnam voted against. It is for the plenary of the General Assembly to agree on the final position on the Protocol. Once adopted the Optional Protocol will enter into force after ratification by 20 States.