113. The aforementioned efforts notwithstanding, the Committee expressed its deep concern at the continuing vestiges of the former regime, at the disturbing use of violent methods and torture in many cases, and at the clemency and impunity enjoyed by the perpetrators of such acts contrary to the requirements of the Convention. 114. The Committee expressed the hope that the Government of Argentina would redouble its efforts to take all legislative, judicial, administrative and other measures which would be sufficiently effective to halt and prevent the practice of torture and of all cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and, where necessary, to punish the perpetrators of such acts. 115. The Committee further expressed the hope that the Government would submit to it as soon as possible the additional information requested by its members. Ukraine 116. The Committee considered the second periodic report of Ukraine (CAT/C/17/Add.4) at its 125th meeting, on 12 November 1992 (see CAT/C/SR.125). 117. In introducing the report, the representative of the State party pointed out that an act on the validity of international agreements in Ukrainian territory had been promulgated on 10 December 1991 and that international agreements ratified by Ukraine formed an integral part of national law. He then referred to the changes taking place in Ukraine, which had started with the proclamation of its independence on 24 August 1991. Generally, it had been decided that the laws in force under the previous regime would be maintained if they were compatible with the new Constitution of Ukraine which was being drafted. In particular, considerable attention was being given to reducing the number of offences punishable by the death penalty and to including a definition of torture in the new codes which were being prepared. The reform of the judiciary had not yet been completed, but legal measures were under consideration to guarantee the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary. In addition, the new Supreme Soviet of Ukraine had set up three Commissions. The first dealt with legislative activities, the second with questions of public order and the third was a human rights commission which considered complaints submitted to it. The authorities also planned to set up a new human rights institute which would be responsible for monitoring the implementation of the relevant legislation. Finally, the representative provided some information on the judicial bodies existing in Ukraine and stated that his Government was actively working on the democratization and modernization of the Ukrainian legal system. 118. Members of the Committee were of the view that the current circumstances and changes in Ukraine made it impossible to judge the results achieved and to assess how the Convention was actually implemented in that country. Perhaps a new report was needed. Furthermore, the report under consideration did not follow the Committee’s general guidelines for the preparation of reports and did not refer to any specific decision or provision taken to give effect to each of the articles of the Convention; it set forth principles and said nothing about their practical implementation. No information had been provided, in particular, on measures taken in Ukraine to implement articles 3 and 5 to 15 of the Convention. 119. Members of the Committee also observed that some provisions of the Convention were reflected in national legislation but not all, and wished to know what measures were being taken to incorporate the provisions of the Convention into internal law and whether the Convention could be invoked before a court. In addition, they asked whether the public and, in particular, the -22-