CAT/C/AND/CO/1
C.
Principal subjects of concern and recommendations
Definition of torture
6.
The Committee is concerned that the State party has not changed the definition of
torture in article 110 of the Criminal Code, which does not reflect all of the elements
contained in article 1 of the Convention, such as the purpose of acts of torture, punishment
of a person or a third person for suspected crimes, coercion, discrimination, complicity or
participation in torture and mention of instigation by, or consent of, a person acting in an
official capacity (arts. 1 and 4).
While noting that international treaties prevail over domestic law in Andorra, the
Committee recommends that the State party amend article 110 of the Criminal Code
to include a definition of torture in conformity with the Convention which covers all
the elements contained in its article 1, including the purpose for acts of torture,
punishment of a person or a third person for suspected crimes, coercion,
discrimination, complicity or participation in torture, and mention of instigation by,
or consent of, a person acting in an official capacity.
Punishment for acts of torture and statute of limitations
7.
The Committee notes that notwithstanding the fact that torture is considered a crime
against humanity in the Criminal Code, article 110 of the Criminal Code envisages a
maximum sentence of imprisonment of only six years for acts of torture, with a possible
increase of the sentence by up to half of the maximum penalty. It is also concerned that the
crime of torture is subject to a statute of limitations of 10 years for prosecution and 15 years
for punishment, which may result in impunity for perpetrators of acts of torture (arts. 2 and
4).
The State party should amend its Criminal Code with a view to introducing
appropriate penalties for acts of torture and genocide beyond 10 years of
imprisonment and ensure that the prosecution and punishment of the crime of torture
is not subject to a statute of limitations, so that acts of torture can be investigated,
prosecuted and punished without risk of impunity.
Fundamental legal safeguards
8.
The Committee notes that, according to the information before it, there have been no
complaints concerning torture. With regard to measures to guarantee the fundamental rights
of persons deprived of their liberty, the Committee is concerned that in certain cases
persons deprived of their liberty do not have access to a doctor of their choice, even at their
own expense, from the very outset of their deprivation of liberty (arts. 2 and 16).
The State party should guarantee that all persons deprived of their liberty have the
right to receive a medical examination by an independent doctor, if possible a doctor
of their choice, from the outset of their deprivation of liberty.
Pretrial detention
9.
Despite the State party’s agreement to the recommendation made under the universal
periodic review to introduce practical measures to lower the number of pretrial detainees,
the Committee is concerned that no sufficient action has yet been taken in this regard (arts.
2, 11 and 16).
The Committee recommends that the State party adopt measures to reduce the
number of pretrial detainees and devise alternative, non-custodial measures, taking
into account the provisions of the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Noncustodial Measures (the Tokyo Rules) and the recommendation made during the
universal periodic review.
2