CAT/C/PRT/CO/7
Only acts of torture that amount to a crime against humanity are not time-barred from
prosecution.
12.
The State party should ensure that the offence of torture is not subject to any
statute of limitations, in order to preclude any risk of impunity in relation to the
investigation of acts of torture and the prosecution and punishment of perpetrators.
Fundamental legal safeguards
13.
The Committee regrets not having received comprehensive information on the
results of monitoring activities conducted to ensure compliance in practice with
fundamental legal safeguards, or indications as to whether any sanctions have been imposed
in cases of non-compliance. In that respect, it has been reported that detainees continue to
have difficulties in gaining access to an ex officio lawyer prior to detention hearings. While
taking note of the content of recommendation IG-2/2014 of 9 May 2014, of the Inspectorate
General of Home Affairs, as well as of assurances given by the State party delegation
during the dialogue, the Committee reiterates its concern that the Code of Criminal
Procedure still does not explicitly guarantee that the time spent in custody for identification
purposes – up to six hours – is counted towards the period of 48 hours within which a
detained person must be brought before a judge. Lastly, the Committee notes with concern
that only a few police stations are currently equipped with closed-circuit television cameras
(art. 2).
14.
The State party should ensure that all persons who are arrested or detained are
afforded in practice all fundamental safeguards against torture from the very outset
of their deprivation of liberty, including the rights to be assisted by a lawyer and to be
brought before a judge without delay. In particular, the State party should:
(a)
Amend the Code of Criminal Procedure to guarantee that the time spent
in custody for identification purposes is considered part of the 48-hour period within
which a detained person must be brought before a judge;
(b)
Guarantee access to an ex officio lawyer, including during the
investigation and interrogation stages;
(c)
Continue to install video surveillance equipment in all areas of custody
facilities where detainees may be present, except in cases in which detainees’ rights to
privacy or to confidential communication with their lawyer or doctor may be violated.
Such recordings should be kept in secure facilities, regularly reviewed by internal and
external monitoring bodies and made available to investigators, detainees and lawyers.
National preventive mechanism
15.
The Committee is concerned about the lack of a specific budget for the work of the
Provedor de Justiça (Ombudsperson) as the national preventive mechanism under the
Optional Protocol to the Convention, and the absence of a multidisciplinary team of fulltime staff assigned exclusively to tasks and activities related to the mechanism. It also
remains concerned by reported difficulties the mechanism has had in accessing nontraditional places of deprivation of liberty, such as psychiatric institutions and social
institutions, especially those run privately (CAT/OP/PRT/1, para. 24) (art. 2).
16.
The State party should ensure the operational autonomy of the national
preventive mechanism and provide it with the necessary earmarked financial and
personnel resources for the performance of its work, in accordance with article 18 (1)
and (3) of the Optional Protocol (see also CAT/OP/12/5, paras. 11–12). Pursuant to
article 20 (c) of the Optional Protocol, the State party should grant the national
preventive mechanism access to all places of detention and their installations and
facilities, as defined in article 4 of the Optional Protocol.
Excessive use of force, including racially motivated violence
17.
The Committee is concerned at allegations of excessive use of force and other police
abuse, in particular against persons belonging to certain racial and ethnic groups. In that
regard, the Committee notes that in May 2019, eight Public Security Police officers were
3