310. Nevertheless, the Committee expected to be provided with further details on the training of health personnel and the outcome of the inquiries conducted by the Canadian authorities relating to two immigrants of Chinese origin, in addition to the statistics requested by the Committee. Panama 311. The Committee considered the second periodic report of Panama (CAT/C/17/Add.7) at its 141st and 142nd meetings, on 21 April 1993 (see CAT/C/SR.141 and 142). 312. The report was introduced by the representative of the State party, who informed the Committee of the efforts his Government had made to improve and adapt the Panamanian penal and penitentiary system to contemporary requirements and of the progress that had been made in bringing the Panamanian justice system into conformity with the Convention. He indicated that those tasks had not been made easier following the events of 20 December 1989, which had led to the destruction of the penitentiary centres and an increase in crime. 313. The representative also provided further information of general interest, relating to the separation of powers between the legislative, judicial and executive branches of government and to the organization and structure of the administration of justice in Panama. In particular, reference was made to the powers and composition of the Supreme Court of Justice and its four chambers, one of which, namely the Administrative Division, following the adoption of a recent law, had the power to annul any administrative decisions that undermined the protection of human rights or were not in conformity with the standards provided for in the international human rights instruments to which Panama was a party. 314. The representative also provided a description of the role of the Public Prosecutor, the Attorney General and the staff of the Public Prosecutor’s Department in the prosecution of crimes. It was indicated that an inquiry into the prosecution of a crime could be opened by the Public Prosecutor on the basis of information received from the media or other sources without the necessity of an individual complaint or accusation. The legal process in place for the prosecution of crimes consisted of three stages. During each stage all the guarantees of due process were respected, for example, presumption of innocence, right to, and contact with, a lawyer, provision of instructions relating to preventive detention, recourse to habeas corpus and prohibition of coercion. The inquiry procedure, or first stage, was of a maximum duration of two months except in exceptional circumstances, when it could be extended for another two months. Once the inquiry had been completed, the process entered its second or intermediate phase with the accused brought before the competent court. Within 15 working days the court had to decide on the merits of the inquiry. In extreme cases, the court could return the case to the Public Prosecutor in order that further inquiries be undertaken. The third stage was preceded by a given period to permit the defence to gather the necessary evidence and to determine whether to challenge the evidence presented by the prosecutor and appeal against the proceedings so far undertaken. On the basis of the evidence before the court, a decision by the court would be pronounced within 10 days. The accused had the right to appeal to a higher court against any sentence handed down to him. 315. In addition, the representative indicated the measures ensure the impartiality and independence of the judiciary. particular, the Council of Judicial Ethics, which evaluated rulings on complaints from victims of violations of certain principles during judicial procedures. -52- taken by Panama to He mentioned, in and handed down ethical or moral