CAT/C/ISL/CO/3
page 2
(b) The provisions of the Penal Code, article 227 (a), that provide a framework for
punishment for trafficking in human beings, and the signing of the Council of Europe
Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, in May 2005;
(c) The enactment of laws amending the Criminal Penal Code and the establishment of a
plan of action with the aim of a more comprehensive response to violence against women and
domestic violence, in particular with respect to legal remedies and in cases of sexual offences;
(d) The issuance of ethical rules for police concerning excessive use of physical force
and verbal abuse.
4.
The Committee again notes with satisfaction that no complaints of torture have been
received from Iceland.
C. Principal subjects of concern and recommendations
Definition of torture and criminalization
5.
While noting the explanations provided by the State party in its second and third periodic
reports and in the written replies to the list of issues with regard to the interpretation of the
definition of torture and its use in domestic criminal legislation, the Committee regrets that no
change has taken place with regard to the State party’s position not to fully incorporate the
definition of torture as defined in article 1 of the Convention, nor to incorporate torture as a
specific crime into domestic criminal legislation (arts. 1 and 4).
The Committee reiterates its previous recommendation, namely that the definition of
torture according to article 1 of the Convention be introduced into Icelandic criminal
legislation in order to ensure that all elements of torture are included, and that
torture be defined as a specific offence in domestic laws. The Committee also draws
the attention of the State party to its general comment No. 2 on the implementation of
article 2.
Independent monitoring
6.
The Committee notes with appreciation the information provided in the State party report
and the written replies to the list of issues that monitoring and inspection of places of detention,
prisons and psychiatric facilities can be undertaken by the Parliamentary Ombudsman on his or
her own initiative and that recommendations made based on such visits are fully taken into
consideration. The Committee is, however, concerned that no legal or administrative system of
independent monitoring or inspection of such facilities, in particular of psychiatric facilities, is in
place (arts. 2 and 13).
The State party should enhance the capacity of the office of the Parliamentary
Ombudsman through appropriate human and financial resources to allow it to
undertake monitoring of places of detention, prisons and psychiatric facilities, and
establish an independent monitoring and inspection system for such facilities. The
State party should also consider the possibility of establishing a national human
rights institution in accordance with the Paris Principles.