CAT/C/34/D/212/2002
page 3
2.2
The complainant alleges that, in the course of his transfer to the Civil Guard station, the
officers took him to a piece of open ground where they subjected him to severe abuse. He was
stripped, handcuffed, dragged along the ground and beaten. He states that after six hours of
interrogation, he had to be taken to hospital because his pulse rate was very high, he could not
speak, he was exhausted and unconscious, and was bleeding from his mouth and nose. The
hospital doctors ascertained that he had injuries to his head, face, eyelids, nose, back, stomach,
hip, arms and legs. He also had a neck injury which left him unable to move. The complainant
maintains that this serious ill-treatment can be categorized as torture within the meaning of
article 1 of the Convention.
2.3
The complainant filed suit with Vizcaya Provincial Court alleging that he had been
tortured, and on 7 November 1997 the court found three civil guards guilty of torture. Each
officer received a prison sentence of four years, two months and one day, was disqualified from
serving in State security agencies and units for six years and one day, and suspended from duty
for the duration of his prison sentence. Under the terms of the sentence, the civil guards were
ordered to pay compensation of 500,000 pesetas to the complainant. The court held that the
injuries sustained by the complainant had been caused by the civil guards in the area of open
country where he was taken following his arrest.
2.4
The public prosecutor’s office appealed the sentence to the Supreme Court, asking for the
charges to be reviewed and the sentences reduced. In its judgement of 30 September 1998, the
Supreme Court decided to reduce the civil guards’ prison sentence to one year. In its judgement,
the Supreme Court held that the civil guards had assaulted the complainant with a view to
obtaining a confession about his activities and the identities of other individuals belonging to the
Bizkaia combat unit. It took the view that “fact-finding” torture of a degree exceeding cruel or
degrading treatment had been established, but held that the injuries suffered by the complainant
had not required medical or surgical attention: the first aid the complainant had received was
sufficient. The Court considered that a sentence of one year’s imprisonment was in proportion to
the gravity of the offence.
2.5
While the appeal was pending before the Supreme Court, one of the civil guards
continued to work in French territory as an anti-terrorism coordinator with the French security
forces, and with the authorization of the Ministry of the Interior embarked on studies with a view
to promotion to the grade of Civil Guard commander.
2.6
The Ministry of Justice initiated proceedings to have the three convicted civil guards
pardoned. The Council of Ministers, at its meeting of 16 July 1999, granted pardons to the
three civil guards, suspending them from any form of public office for one month and one day.
Notwithstanding this suspension, the Ministry of the Interior kept one of the civil guards on
active duty in a senior post. The pardons were granted by the King in decrees published in
Spain’s Official Gazette.
2.7
The complainant alleges that he has exhausted all available domestic remedies and has
not submitted the matter to any other procedure of international investigation.