... custody with further guarantees of protection against abuse of power or ill-treatment; the need to guarantee the same rights to a person in administrative detention as to a person who had been deprived of his freedom according to judicial proceedings; the need to improve the provision of training and information to civilian or military law enforcement personnel, public Officials, policemen and prison staff and to improve the independence of the jUdiciary and the supervision of conditions of detention in prisons; and the need to investigate alleged cases of torture or ill-treatment. 284. The Committee also suggested that the advisory services and technical assistance programme of the Centre for Human Rights could be called upon to assist the Government in its efforts to improve the implementation of the provisions of the Convention, particularly by formulating training programmes for the various categories of officials. Luxembourg 285. The Committee considered the initial report of Luxembourg (CAT/C/S/Add.29) at its l07th and l08th meetings, held on 29 April 1992 (CAT/C/SR.107 and 108). 286. The report was introduced by the representative of the State party who said that respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms was a real concern of his Government. In illustration of that point, the representative briefly described the manner in which Luxembourg was involved in the promotion of human rights at the national, regional and global levels. He also indicated that a commission on legislative reform had been formed in Luxembourg to adopt measures required by the Convention against Torture and that the Luxembourg authorities would very much welcome any observations and suggestions the Committee might wish to make in that connection. 287. Members of the Committee expressed satisfaction with the report submitted by the Government of Luxembourg. However, as the report was rather brief, they requested further clarification on a number of points. 288. With regard to matters of a general nature, members of the Committee wished to know how the provisions of international instruments were incorporated into domestic legislation and how any contradictions between provisions of the Convention and domestic law were resolved. They also requested further details concerning the legal structure, judicial arrangements and the separation of powers. Additionally, they wished to know whether there were any state security organs; whether habeas corpus existed; whether capital punishment and forced labour were still resorted to; how many prisons there were and how many persons were in prison or in detention. A breakdown was also requested of the number of persons held under different punishment regimes. 289. With reference to specific articles of the Convention, members of the Committee noted that the definition of torture as contained in article 1 of the Convention had not been incorporated into Luxembourg's legislation. Therefore, they wished to know whether domestic legal provisions in Luxembourg punished both psychological and physical torture. They also asked whether Luxembourg legislation clearly distinguished between torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. -54- Digitized by Dag Hammarskjöld Library 2~ wl: at St 29 pr im he 29 wi ar Lu ha dOl 29: JUI 29' re< ab< 29! wi~ pel 24· bot OWl sue eOrl da~ 296 Corn any tha rep tho 297 to the com] 298 SOUl wrol 299, whet hele