A/HRC/31/57/Add.2 II. Legal and Institutional Framework to Combat and Prevent Torture and Other Ill-Treatment A. The prohibition of torture in national legislation 8. Ghana’s core participation in the Convention Against Torture Initiative 2014 – 2024, a global initiative for the universal ratification and implementation of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (the Convention), is an important indication of its ongoing commitment to eradicate the scourge of torture at home and abroad. Nevertheless, the Special Rapporteur regrets that the offense of torture, as defined in the Convention, has not yet been introduced into the Criminal Code (Criminal Offences Act 1960), and urges the Government to accelerate efforts to ensure the domestication of the Convention by establishing torture as an offence in national law, adopt a definition that is in line with international standards, and ensure that the offence is punishable by appropriate penalties in accordance with article 4(2) of the Convention. During talks with authorities, he repeatedly heard that the absence of a definition of torture in national law is a major impediment to achieving progress in the realms of accountability and prevention. B. Monitoring and inspection of places of detention 9. Ghana has not delivered on its commitment to ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention (OPCAT), which it signed in 2006. Last year, the Government stated that it would take steps towards ratification without further delay, and it is reported that the Cabinet approved legislation for OPCAT ratification in July 2015, which is currently pending approval by Parliament. The obligation to prevent torture and other ill-treatment constitutes a fundamental legal obligation, and the establishment of an independent National Preventive Mechanism (NPM) to monitor places of detention – in spite of financial constraints – is absolutely essential in view of current challenges. 10. While welcoming the role played by the Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice (CHRAJ) in seeking ratification of the OPCAT, the Special Rapporteur expresses particular disappointment that CHRAJ has abandoned its de facto prison monitoring mandate, and has not carried out visits to prisons since before his 2013 mission. In the aftermath of the Special Rapporteur’s visit, CHRAJ renewed its commitment to intensify its responsibilities to ensure that the State lives up to its human rights obligations, including the eradication of torture. However, he is concerned that the body is unable to effectively fulfill its triple mandate of Ombudsman, Anti-Corruption Agency, and National Human Rights Institution, and in particular that of monitoring and ensuring the prevention of torture in places of deprivation of liberty, given its admittedly “woefully inadequate” budgetary allocations that have led to its experiencing “critical and systematic human, infrastructural, and logistical constraints.” 1 Should CHRAJ be designated to serve as Ghana’s NPM, significant changes would need to be implemented in order to ensure the effective discharge of its mandate and full compliance with the Paris Principles. The future NPM must operate on the basis of a broad legal mandate enabling it to visit, at regular intervals and unannounced, all places of detention, including privatelyrun institutions like prayer camps; to receive complaints and initiate prosecutions; and to publish and widely disseminate its findings and make recommendations to the Government. It must be endowed with an independent operating budget and sufficient human and 1 4 CHRAJ, Five Year Strategic Plan 2011-2015.