E/CN.4/1997/7 page 45 received on the prosecution of officials of the Human Rights Foundation of Turkey (HRFT), a non-governmental organization operating four torture rehabilitation centres. Mustafa Cinkilic, the Adana representative of HRFT, was charged in connection with the operation of the Adana rehabilitation centre without licensing from the Department of Health. Tufan Köse, the doctor in charge at the HRFT Adana office, was charged with failing to notify the judiciary or police magistrate that 167 patients examined by him had claimed to have been subjected to torture and with failing to make certain information about those patients available when requested to do so by the Public Prosecutor. Their trial was scheduled to reconvene on 17 January 1997. (Similar charges of opening an unlicensed health centre, brought by the Istanbul Beyo lu Public Prosecution Office against the Istanbul representative of HRFT, ükran Akin, reportedly resulted in his acquittal on 1 November 1996.) In addition, notice was reportedly served upon HRFT by the head of the Department for Annexed and New Foundations that the organization was to be investigated for “collaboration” with various non-governmental and intergovernmental agencies, including the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture, without having obtained permission from the authorities. It was alleged that the legal actions constituted elements of a concerted effort on the part of a number of governmental ministries to curtail or halt altogether the activities of HRFT and that an inter-ministry meeting had been convened for this purpose. The principle expressed in article 14 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and in Commission on Human Rights resolution 1996/33 that national legal systems should ensure that the victims of acts of torture are afforded medical rehabilitation appeared to be strained, if not breached, by the actions of the Government. Many patients might fear that adverse consequences could result from disclosure of medical records and so might avoid seeking treatment. In addition, as principles of medical ethics might compel doctors under circumstances arising in the cases of some HRFT patients to maintain strict confidentiality, they might be deterred from rendering their services for fear of prosecution for behaving in accordance with professional ethics. The Special Rapporteur and Chairman accordingly appealed to the Government to refrain from taking action against HRFT personnel that could effectively limit the activities of rehabilitation service providers or restrict the opportunities for torture victims to receive rehabilitation services and to take care not to inhibit the flow of scarce financial resources to Turkey earmarked for torture rehabilitation. Observations 199. The Special Rapporteur appreciates the Government’s responses, but continues to be concerned at the apparently widespread practice of torture in Turkey. In this respect, he notes the public statement issued at the end of 1996 by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT). The Committee, after visiting places of detention on a number of occasions over recent years, most recently in September 1996, asserted that “resort to torture and other forms of severe ill-treatment remains a common occurrence in police establishments in Turkey. To attempt to characterize the problem as one of isolated acts of the kind which can occur in any country - as some are wont to do - is to fly in the face of the facts”. 3 The Special Rapporteur was particularly struck by the CPT's observation that “the cases of seven persons (four women and three men)