CAT/C/USA/CO/3-5
(c)
Presidential Executive Order 13567, issued on 7 March 2011, which
establishes a periodic review of individuals detained at the Guantanamo Bay detention
facility who have not been charged, convicted or designated for transfer;
(d)
Supreme Court rulings in Graham v. Florida (2010), which prohibited
sentences of life imprisonment without parole for children convicted of non-homicide
offences, and Miller v. Alabama (2012), which barred sentences of mandatory life
imprisonment without parole for children convicted of homicide offences.
5.
The Committee also welcomes the efforts of the State party to amend its policies,
programmes and administrative measures to give effect to the Convention, including:
(a)
Adoption of the Directive on the appropriate use of segregation in
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention facilities, in 2013; and ICE revised
Performance-Based National Detention Standards, in 2011;
(b)
Promulgation of the National Standards to Prevent, Detect, and Respond to
Sexual Abuse in Confinement Facilities, in accordance with the Prison Rape Elimination
Act of 2003, in 2012; and the efforts undertaken by the State party to ensure respect of the
act in federal, state and local facilities and to collect data on the extent of sexual violence in
detention.
6.
The Committee welcomes the firm and principled position adopted by the State
party with regard to the applicability of the Convention during armed conflict, and its
statement that a time of war does not suspend the operation of the Convention, which
continues to apply even when the State is engaged in an armed conflict.
7.
It also welcomes the State party’s long-standing commitment to the United Nations
Voluntary Funds for Victims of Torture and its mission.
8.
Finally, the Committee notes with appreciation President Obama’s public statement
on 1 August 2014, in which he qualified some of the so-called “enhanced interrogationtechniques” as acts of torture.
C.
Principal subjects of concern and recommendations
Definition and criminalization of torture
9.
Notwithstanding the State party’s statement that under United States law, acts of
torture are prohibited by various statutes and may be prosecuted in a variety of ways, the
Committee regrets that the specific offence of torture has not yet been introduced at the
federal level. The Committee is of the view that the introduction of the offence of torture, in
full conformity with article 1 of the Convention, would strengthen the human rights
protection framework in the State party. The Committee also regrets that the State party
maintains a restrictive interpretation of the provisions of the Convention and does not
intend to withdraw any of its interpretative understandings lodged at the time of ratification.
In particular, the concept of “prolonged mental harm” introduces a subjective nonmeasurable element which undermines the application of the treaty. While noting the
delegation’s explanations on this matter, especially with regard to articles 1 and 16 of the
Convention, the Committee recalls that, under international law, reservations that are
contrary to the object and purpose of a treaty are not permissible (arts. 1 and 2, paras. 1 and
4).
The Committee reiterates its previous recommendation (A/55/44, para. 180 (a) and
CAT/C/USA/CO/2, para. 13) that the State party criminalize torture at the federal
level, in full conformity with article 1 of the Convention, and ensure that penalties for
torture are commensurate with the gravity of the crime. It recommends the re-
2