(e)That when indigenous persons have been legitimately detained under exceptional circumstances, they are held in conditions which are consistent with their personal dignity, and that their right to personal integrity is guaranteed by the State; (f)That they are placed in the detention centre nearest to their indigenous community and their family, so that they are able to receive frequent visits and follow their traditional practices and customs, which will minimize the risk of their being isolated from their relatives, culture and religion; (g)That indigenous persons in places of detention are not segregated or subjected to discrimination on account of their status. Nor should they be pushed to abandon their language, traditional dress or customs by means of threats, mockery or humiliation; (h)That indigenous women in detention enjoy the same protection as indigenous men, and that their dignity is respected as regards practices related to their sexuality and traditional values associated with, inter alia, their appearance, hair, clothes, and nudity; (i)Indigenous detainees have the right to freedom of expression in the language of their preference. Any ban or restriction on the use of this language is a violation of the rules on the collective treatment of detainees and is particularly serious when the language represents part of a person’s identity as a member of his or her indigenous community. 5. Links between indigenous justice and the prevention of torture (a) Prevention of torture in the indigenous justice system 90.The recognition of indigenous justice as part of the collective rights of indigenous peoples confers a responsibility on indigenous authorities exercising their power to settle disputes. This responsibility involves observance not only of the norms, values and principles which constitute their law but also of internationally recognized human rights, such as the right to personal integrity, and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. 91.It is essential to distinguish acts of torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment from practices which are, according to the world view of indigenous peoples, forms of spiritual purification and healing for individuals who have been punished under the indigenous justice system. From an intercultural perspective, these practices, such as ice-cold baths or the use of stinging nettles to purify perpetrators, are consistent with the assertion in the Convention against Torture that “the term ‘torture’ … does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions (art. 1). (b) Role of indigenous justice in the prevention of torture 92.In modern societies, torture and ill-treatment are closely linked to the notion of State power. In traditional societies, social organization is completely different, as justice is based mainly on consensus and mediation. Thus, the initial stage of what we understand as criminal proceedings does not necessarily involve deprivation of liberty. Torture and ill-treatment are therefore quite rare in traditional societies. 93.Custodial sentences, which the State justice system usually imposes in criminal cases, are barely used in the indigenous justice system, as community ties determine the structure of the individual and collective identity of community members, and imprisonment directly undermines these ties. For many indigenous persons, imprisonment constitutes cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and even a form of torture. 94.Strengthening the indigenous justice system and its forms of social control and punishment for violating its laws could therefore serve to prevent torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of indigenous persons. VI.Looking forward 95.The end of this reporting period sees the departure of 5 of the 10 founder members of the Subcommittee who were elected in October 2006 and who were ineligible for re-election to a further term of office at the meeting of States parties in October 2012. They, and their experiences, will be much missed and it is unfortunate the Subcommittee has lost so many experienced members at this time of transition and development. Departures, however, bring with them the opportunity to welcome new colleagues and the Subcommittee is looking forward with anticipation to welcoming its new members in 2013 and to working with them to develop further new, innovative and effective means of fulfilling its mandate of preventing torture and ill-treatment. A. Plan of work for 2013 96. The plan of work for 2012 was ambitious, both in scale and in kind. Hitherto, the Subcommittee had undertaken a maximum of three visits in a 12-month period. In order to respond to the increasing number of States parties, and the opportunities presented by the increased membership, that number was doubled to six. Moreover, three of the visits were of an innovative nature, focusing on the establishment and work of the NPM, and thereby bringing into focus the Subcommittee’s responsibility under article 11 (b) (ii) and (iii) of the Optional Protocol. For operational reasons, one projected visit, that to Gabon, will now be conducted in 2013. 97. The programme for 2013 looks to consolidate the achievements of 2012 in two ways. First, it maintains the increased tempo of its activities by conducting a further six visits, in addition to the postponed visit from 2013. Secondly, it includes a broader range of forms of visit within a single year than has previously been the case. To that end, the Subcommittee decided at its seventeenth session (June 2012) to conduct the following country visits in 2013: regular country visits to New Zealand, Peru and Togo; NPM advisory visits to Armenia and Germany; and a follow-up visit in accordance with article 13, paragraph 4, of the Optional Protocol. 98. As in previous years, the Subcommittee took account of various factors when selecting countries for visits, giving careful consideration to factors such as the period of time since ratification, the situation as regards the establishment and operation of the