34 United Nations Convention Against Torture and its Optional Protocol 33  The language of the draft Swedish text46 upon which the Working Group based the main part of its discussions refers to torture inflicted ‘by or at the instigation of a public official’. There was a lengthy discussion but no agreement on the definition of ‘public official’ by the Working Group. It was suggested that torture inflicted by persons other than public officials be included in the text of the Convention.47 At the same time some speakers pointed out that the act of torture committed by a public official was different in nature from, and inherently more serious than, that inflicted by a private person, and that the elimination of the former category of torture should be the main target of the Convention. 34  During the discussion on the Convention in 1978 in the Third Committee of the General Assembly the French delegation proposed that private individuals be mentioned in Article 1. The Director of the UN’s Division of Human Rights intervened in favour of the proposal and pointed out that some States provided information on methods of torture and that perhaps States should give more consideration to the point.48 35  In their written comments, some Governments submitted alternative text proposals. Austria proposed that the concept could be expanded to include ‘persons acting in an official capacity’.49 The United Kingdom proposed to insert ‘or any other agent of the state’ after public official to add clarity to the definition.50 Both the United States and the Federal Republic of Germany proposed that the term ‘public official’ be defined.51 The FRG’s proposal covered a wide range of cases and extended to individuals outside the Government. In particular they felt it should be made clear that public official included persons who, regardless of legal status, have been assigned public authority by State organs on a permanent basis or in an individual case, but also to persons who, in certain regions or under particular conditions, actually hold and exercise authority over others and whose authority is comparable to Government authority or—​be it temporarily—​has replaced Government authority or whose authority has been derived from such persons.52 The United States proposed a more elaborate definition of the concept ‘public official’ which sought to clarify the breadth of the concept and to make clear that both civil and military officials were included, expressing concern that the situation might arise where any person vested with the exercise of some official power of the State may well have sufficient authority to coerce another individual, and could escape prosecution under national law because of his public office. They therefore proposed the following language in order to cover such a scenario: any public official who a) consents to an act of torture, b) assists, incites, solicits, commands, or conspires with others to commit torture, or c) fails to take appropriate measures to prevent or suppress torture when such person has knowledge or should have knowledge that torture has or is being committed and has authority or is in a position to take such measures, also commits the offence of torture within the meaning of this convention.53 36  Barbados expressed the opinion that the definition be extended to cover acts of private individuals in light of the provisions of Articles 7 and 8 of the original Swedish draft. 47   E/​CN.4/​1285  (n  3).   E/​CN.4/​1314 (n 8) 9, para 43.   Summary Record of the seventy-​third Meeting of the Third Committee, General Assembly, thirty-​third Session (1978) UN Doc A/​C.3/​33/​SR.73, 2. 49 50 51   E/​CN.4/​1314/​Add.1 (n 22) para  43.   ibid, para 2, § 3.   E/​CN.4/​1314  (n  8). 52   E/​CN.4/​1314/​Add.2 (n 9) 2. See also reference 94 in Boulesbaa (n 30). 53   E/​CN.4/​1314 (n 8) para 45. This language was intended as a restatement of Art 7 of the Swedish draft defining the responsibility for committing an offence under the Convention. 46 48 Zach