CAT/C/COL/CO/5
(b)
The promulgation of Act No. 1719 of 18 June 2014, which deals with access
to justice for victims of sexual violence, especially in the context of the armed conflict.
6.
The Committee recognizes the efforts that the State party is making to reach an
agreement within the framework of the current peace process, which was set in motion in
August 2012. It encourages the State party to pursue those negotiations and welcomes the
fact that victims’ rights are one of the main items on the agenda.
Principal subjects of concern and recommendations
The crime of torture
7.
The Committee feels that the definition of the offence of torture as set forth in
articles 137 and 178 of the Criminal Code does not encompass acts of torture committed for
the purpose of intimidating or coercing a third party. It also wishes to reiterate the concern
that it has expressed earlier (CAT/C/COL/CO/4, para. 10) about the tendency to assimilate
the crime of torture to other less serious criminal offences and to take the mistaken
approach of subsuming acts of torture under other related offences (arts. 1 and 4).
The State party should amend the Criminal Code so that the definition of the crime of
torture encompasses all the elements listed in article 1 of the Convention, including, in
particular, acts of torture committed to intimidate or coerce a third person. The State
party should also ensure that offences are classified correctly and that persons
committing the crime of torture are punished in a manner that is commensurate with
the gravity of their acts. The Committee recommends that the State party 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 of torture.
Fundamental legal safeguards
8.
The Committee observes with concern that article 303 (the rights of arrested persons)
of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not establish the right to be examined by an
independent physician. It also believes that the wording of paragraph 4 of that article lends
itself to an overly broad interpretation inasmuch as it states that the arrested person should
receive the assistance of counsel “as soon as possible”, which could open the way for
abuses (art. 2).
The State party should provide de jure and de facto guarantees that persons who are
deprived of their liberty have the benefit of all fundamental legal safeguards from the
moment that they are arrested. These safeguards include, in particular, the right to
have the assistance of counsel without delay and the right to request a medical
examination by a physician of one’s choice, regardless of any medical examination
that may be conducted at the request of the authorities.
Mass arrests for purposes of recruitment
9.
The Committee wishes to express its satisfaction with the content and scope of
Constitutional Court decision No. C-879 of 22 November 2011, but it is concerned by
reports that military operations continue to be conducted in which men of military age are
taken into custody indiscriminately in order to identify those who have not completed their
mandatory military service. The Committee is also concerned by reports that persons held
in custody during these operations have been subjected to acts of aggression (arts. 2 and 16).
The State party should ensure that military personnel act in strict accordance with the
law, as stated in decision No. C-879 of the Constitutional Court.
2
GE.15-08413