CAT/OP/CHL/1
II. National preventive mechanism.
12.
The Subcommittee commends the State party for its participation in the Convention
against Torture Initiative, which promotes technical assistance and cooperation between
States parties as a means of overcoming the challenges arising from the ratification and
implementation of that Convention. The Subcommittee also acknowledges the State party’s
support of the resolution adopted by the Human Rights Council in March 2016 on torture
and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment: safeguards to prevent
torture during police custody and pretrial detention. In that resolution, the States stressed
that:
Inspections of places of police custody and pretrial detention by an independent
authority contribute to the prevention of torture and other cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment and that, to be fully effective, such visits should
be regular and able to be made unannounced, and the authority should be
empowered to examine all issues related to the treatment of persons in police
custody and pretrial detention and to interview detained persons in full
confidentiality.2
13.
The Subcommittee notes with concern, however, that the State party’s fulfilment of
its obligations under the Optional Protocol with regard to the creation of a national
preventive mechanism is more than six years overdue, 3 a situation made all the more
striking by the fact that there are so few States parties with a delay of that length. In this
regard, at its twenty-eighth session (held from 15 to 19 February 2016), the Subcommittee
decided to publish a list of those States parties whose compliance with the obligation to
create a national preventive mechanism was at least three years overdue.
14.
It should also be recalled that, in 2014, during the second universal periodic review
of Chile, the Chilean Government accepted a recommendation to accelerate efforts to
establish a national preventive mechanism.
15.
Although the Subcommittee was informed that the National Human Rights Institute
established in 2009 had been designated as the national preventive mechanism by the
Government, the mechanism’s legal framework, structure and budget have yet to be
established.
16.
The Optional Protocol states unequivocally that States parties should allocate
resources to national preventive mechanisms for their operations so as to guarantee their
functional independence (Optional Protocol, art. 18 (1)). Accordingly, the national
preventive mechanism should act independently not only of the Government, but also of the
National Human Rights Institute. Thus, the State party should earmark a specific allocation
of funding for the national preventive mechanism.
17.
The Subcommittee recommends that, in order to guarantee the functional
independence of the national preventive mechanism, it should not be subordinate in
any way to the National Human Rights Institute. The organizational hierarchy of the
Institute should reflect the requirements set forth in the Optional Protocol, namely
that the national preventive mechanism should have operational autonomy as regards
its resources, programme of work, findings and recommendations and a direct and
confidential means of maintaining contact with the Subcommittee.
18.
During the visit, the Subcommittee met with members of Congress to encourage the
legislature to contribute to the fulfilment of the commitment voluntarily assumed by the
State party to establish a national preventive mechanism as quickly as possible.
19.
Following those meetings, on 12 April 2016, the Subcommittee was informed that
the Chamber of Deputies Committee on Human Rights had submitted a draft agreement
whereby the President of Chile would be requested to present a bill for the creation of a
national preventive mechanism without delay.
2
3
4
A/HRC/31/L.26/Rev.1.
Optional Protocol, art. 17.
GE.17-07771