CAT/C/CR/29/5
page 2
B. Positive aspects
4.
The Committee notes the following positive developments:
(a)
The creation of a Legal Chancellor who also acts in the capacity of an
ombudsman;
(b)
The abolition of the death penalty in 1998;
(c)
The possible direct applicability, under the Constitution, of the definition of
torture set out in article 1 of the Convention;
(d)
The entry into force on 1 September 2002 of the new Penal Code, which
introduces torture as an offence and aims at developing a flexible and individualized penal
system that will increase the possibilities for the rehabilitation of prisoners by providing them
with an opportunity to work or study;
(e)
The improvement of prison conditions through, in particular, the suppression of
special punishment cells, the renovation of detention facilities and the opening of the new Tartu
prison, which will conform to recognized international standards. The Committee also
welcomes the entry into force on 1 December 2000 of the Imprisonment Act, based on the
“European Prison Rules”, as well as the power given to the Legal Chancellor and members of the
Health Protection Office under the 2000 Internal Rules of Detention to have free access to all
rooms in detention centres;
(f)
The publication of the reports of the European Committee for the Prevention of
Torture and the responses by the State party, which will enable a general debate by all interested
parties;
(g)
The commitment of the State party to continue its practice of publishing the
concluding observations of the United Nations treaty bodies, as well as the reports submitted by
Estonia to those bodies, on the web site of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs;
(h)
The ratification by the State party on 30 January 2002 of the Rome Statute of the
International Criminal Court;
(i)
The assurance given by the State party that due consideration will be given to the
possible ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention.
C. Subjects of concern
5.
The Committee is concerned that:
(a)
Article 1 of the Convention has not yet been directly applied by magistrates, and
that the direct application of international human rights treaties, although possible in theory, is
not widely practised in the courts;