CAT/C/NZL/CO/5 page 5 Ensuring prosecution 10. The Committee is concerned that the Crimes of Torture Act 1989 provides that no proceedings for the trial and punishment of a person charged with torture under the Act shall be instituted without the consent of the Attorney-General. The Committee is further concerned that if it were alleged that a member of the New Zealand Armed Forces had committed an offence under the Crimes of Torture Act, the commanding officer of that person might decide not to record a charge under that Act or refer the allegation to the appropriate civil authority for investigation if he considered that the allegation is not well-founded. Lastly, the Committee is also concerned that if it were alleged that a serious crime such as an offence under the Crimes of Torture Act had been committed, the decision to prosecute the alleged perpetrator, subject to the Attorney-General’s consent, would be left to the police if found to be in the public interest. (art. 12) The State party should consider abandoning the system which gives the Attorney General discretion to decide whether or not to prosecute, even in cases in which there is reasonable ground to believe that an act of torture has been committed, as well as the discretion given to the police to prosecute alleged perpetrators on the basis of public interest. In addition, the State party should ensure that where there is reasonable ground to believe that an act of torture has been committed, impartial and effective investigations should be launched immediately, even in cases where a commanding officer considers that the allegation is not well-founded. Allegations of ill-treatment 11. The Committee is concerned that allegations of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, inflicted by persons acting in an official capacity against children in State institutions, and against patients in psychiatric hospitals have not been investigated, perpetrators not prosecuted, and victims not accorded redress, including adequate compensation and rehabilitation. (arts.12, 14 and 16) The State party should take appropriate measures to ensure that allegations of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in the “historic cases” are investigated promptly and impartially, perpetrators duly prosecuted, and the victims accorded redress, including adequate compensation and rehabilitation. Independent Police Conduct Authority 12. In spite of the assurances given by the State party, the Committee remains concerned that the impartiality of the Independent Police Conduct Authority might be hampered by the inclusion of both current and former police officers regarding impartial and effective investigations into alleged acts of torture and ill-treatment by members of the police, in accordance with the provisions of the Convention. (art.12) The State party should further strengthen the independence of the Independent Police Conduct Authority which should be staffed with independent experts drawn from outside the Police. 13. The Committee is concerned that the Independent Police Conduct Authority may decide not to take action on complaints, including on grounds of torture or ill-treatment, in circumstances where the complainant has had knowledge of the matters under complaint for more than 12 months before the complaint was made. (art.12)