(17) The Committee requests that the HKSAR provide, within one year, information on its response to the Committee’s recommendations contained in paragraphs 7, 10 and 12 above. (18) The HKSAR is invited to submit its next periodic report, which will be included in China’s fifth periodic report, by 21 November 2012. 40. Macao A. Introduction (1) The Committee against Torture considered the fourth periodic report of China with respect to the Macao Special Administrative Region (Macao SAR) (CAT/C/MAC/4) at its 844th and 846th meetings, held on 7 and 10 November 2008 (CAT/C/SR.844 and 846), and adopted, at its 864th meeting, on 21 November 2008 (CAT/C/SR.864), the following concluding observations. B. Positive aspects (2) The Committee welcomes the submission of the report of Macao SAR, included in the fourth periodic report of the State party China. It also welcomes the written replies to the list of issues (CAT/C/MAC/Q/4/Add.1) which provided additional information on the legislative, administrative, judicial and other measures taken for the implementation of the Convention. (3) The Committee notes with appreciation: (a) The new Law 6/2008 on the Fight Against Trafficking in Persons, which define and criminalize trafficking in accordance with international standards; (b) Law 1/2004, establishing the Legal Framework on the Recognition and Loss of Refugee Status, which set up a Commission for Refugees to assess asylum claims in cooperation with UNHCR; and (c) The creation, in 2005, of the Commission for Disciplinary Control of the Security Forces and Services of Macao, which has, inter alia, the mandate to consider complaints lodged by individuals who consider that their rights have been infringed. C. Main issues of concern and recommendations Definition and criminalization of torture (4) The Committee takes note of the Macao SAR’s explanation with respect to the term “public official” contained in article 234 read in conjunction with article 235 of the Criminal Code. Nonetheless, the Committee is concerned that the restriction mentioned in article 234 (1) of the Criminal Code regarding the scope of the crime to the mentioned public officials is not fully compliant with the definition of torture contained in article 1, paragraph 1, of the Convention. The Macao SAR should adopt a definition of the term “public official” fully in line with article 1, paragraph 1, of the Convention, so as to include all acts inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of all public officials or other persons acting in an official capacity. The Committee further recommends that Macao SAR consider using a wording of the definition of torture similar to that used in the Convention so as to ensure that all elements contained in article 1, including discrimination of any kind, are covered in the definition. (5) The Committee takes note of the difference between the crimes provided for by the Criminal Code in articles 234 (torture) and 236 (serious torture) as illustrated in the Macao SAR’s report and replies to the list of issues. The Committee is concerned that this distinction may lead to the perception that there are more and less serious crimes of torture, a distinction which not only is wrong but can create obstacles to effective prosecution of all cases of torture. 32