106 II – 6 LETTER UN Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture Ms Aneta Stančevska SPT Member and Country Rapporteur for the Republic of Serbia Subcommittee on Prevention of torture INFORMATION FOR Subcommittee on Prevention of torture RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS FROM A LETTER DATED 2 DECEMBER 2013 Dear Ms Stančevska, I would like to thank you for your comments on 2012 Annual Report of the NPM of the Republic of Serbia. NPM will accept all of your remarks. I hope that following answers would contribute clearer picture about the work of the NPM of Serbia. 1. Based on the visits to the police stations conducted in 2012 in cooperation with the Belgrade Center for Human Rights, the Serbian NPM made 150 recommendations in its reports submitted to the institutions visited in 2012, as well as another 56 recommendations in the remaining reports submitted to these institutions in January and February 2013. Out of the total number of 206 recommendations, the relevant authorities accepted 193 recommendations. The implementation of these recommendations was discussed during several meetings of the cooperative dialogue with the police. Most of those recommendations not implemented by the authorities were made to improve the material conditions in detention rooms, while failure to implement the recommendations was, in most cases, justified by the lack of financial resources. In order to implement the recommendations for improving the material conditions all police stations required additional funding from the Ministry of Interior. The Annual Report of the NPM for 2012 made a reference to it in the Paragraph 7 which says that a general recommendation was made to administrative authorities to bring the material conditions of their detention rooms in line with the existing standards. The Serbian NPM does not accept these excuses and maintains its position that the lack of financial resources is not the justifiable reason for poor material conditions. Based on 38 visits to the police stations conducted in 2013 and 160 recommendations made, we can conclude that no significant improvements were made. For these reasons, we will pay more attention to this issue in our 2013 Annual Report. 2. As far as remand is concerned (pre-trial/trial detention), 20 recommendations were made, all were accepted but only 7 were implemented to date. The lack of financial resources is again stated by the relevant authorities as the main reason for failure to implement the remaining 13 recommendations mostly pertaining to material conditions. Nevertheless, we have to note that during 2013 capacities of the detention places were renovated and aligned with the existing standards to a considerable extent (for example, at the Belgrade District Prison detention facility and the Valjevo Juvenile Correctional Facility). In the following period, through its follow-up visits the Serbian NPM will continue to monitor how many recommendations submitted in 2013 were implemented and what changes were made. 3. In the penitentiary field, 64 recommendations in the visits reports in 2012 were implemented. In this area as well, it is clear from the authorities’ responses that the major obstacle to the implementation of the remaining recommendations (mostly pertaining to the improvement of material conditions in prisons) is the lack of financial resources. The amnesty which was implemented in the previous period reduced the prison overcrowding by 10%, which to a certain extent created an opportunity for increasing the available capacity for the most vulnerable prisoners. What concerns us most is the fact that the recommendations pertaining to the right to health care and labor, as well as the preparation for release, are not sufficiently implemented. A reference in the 2012 NPM Annual Report said that a general recommendation was submitted to the administrative authorities that it was necessary to rectify the above mentioned irregularities and bring the operations in line with the existing standards.