P strengthening of the legal system and the judiciary, could confidently be said that Spain was continuing fronts . deserved respect to ma&e progress and it on all 183. Nevertheless, members noted that there were a number of problems that still gave rise to concern, some of which were the same as had been expressed during the consideration of the second periodic report. Among such concerns were the number of offences carrying the death penaltyl the suspension of the rights of terrorist suspects under article 55 (2) of the Constitution and the fact that circumstances had given rise to what amounted to permanent emergency legislation; the need to take action aimed at preventing cases of torture and ill-treatment, such as police and security force training, as recommended in the report of the People’s Advocate: the military nature of the -8 the excessive length of the pre-trial detention period and its linkage to the length of the maximum allowable sentence; and conscientious objection. Members also expressed the hope that future reports would include more information on factors and difficulties encounLered in implementing the Covenant. 184. The representative of the State party thanked the members of the Committee for their interest and cooperation and assured them that the Committee’s concerns and observations would be duly conveyed to his Government. 185. Concluding,the consideration of the third periodic report of Spain, the Chairman thanked the delegation for the quality of the report and the dialogue it had initiated, which had revealed many positive factors, particularly the Government’s commitient to strengthening the machinery of justice. 186. The Committee considered the third periodic report of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic (CCPR/C/56/Add.B) at its 1028th, 1029th and 1031st meetings, on 5 and 6 November 1990 (see CCPR/C/SR.1028, SR.1029 and SR.1031). 187. The report was introduced by the representative of the State party, who noted that many changes bearing on human rights had occurred since the submission of the report. As a result of the first multi-candidate elections held on March 1990, representatives of many different political groups now sat in the Ukrainian Supreme Soviet. A new law had abolished the monopoly previously exercised by the Ukrainian Communist Party over all areas of public life, and it was no longer necessary to be a member of a particular political party in order to work for bodies concerned with internal affairs and national security. The adoption of a Dealaration of State Sovereignty of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic had led to considerable debate about the future role of the Ukrainian SSR within the WSR, as well as to a number of difficult legal problems that had not yet been overcome. 188. In addition, the Supreme Soviet had appointed a commission to draw up a new Constitution and had under consideration a number of bills relating, &u, to economic independence, corsumer rights, citfaenship, public freedom of movement, and the right of citizens to complain organisations, directly to the court6 against unlawful acts committed by officials. On 27 October 1990, a Constitutional Court had been established which could, -45-