CAT/OP/ESP/1 17. The Subcommittee recommends that the State party: (a) Harmonize the content of article 174 of the Criminal Code with international norms, in particular article 1 of the Convention against Torture; (b) Remove the distinction between severe and non-severe torture established in article 174 of the Criminal Code; (c) Establish appropriate penalties for perpetrators of torture which take into account the seriousness of the offence in accordance with article 4 (2) of the Convention; (d) torture. B. Establish the non-applicability of statutory limitations to all acts of Incommunicado detention 18. The Subcommittee acknowledges that the Criminal Procedure Act was amended by Organic Act No. 13/2015, which introduced changes to the rules governing incommunicado detention. One of the most salient changes is that incommunicado detention will be permitted in only two situations: (a) when there is an urgent need to avoid serious consequences that might pose a threat to a person’s life, freedom or physical integrity; (b) when there is an urgent need for immediate action by the investigating judges in order to avoid seriously compromising criminal proceedings. Furthermore, incommunicado detention can be applied only by judicial order and is limited to 10 days in duration (an initial period of 5 days with the possibility of a single 5-day extension). Nevertheless, the Subcommittee is concerned that the State party has not implemented all of the reforms it mentioned during the universal periodic review, such as the audio and video recording of persons held in incommunicado detention in police stations and a visit every 8 hours by a forensic doctor and a doctor appointed by the national preventive mechanism. It is further concerned that incommunicado detention continues to be applied to children between the ages of 16 and 18. 19. The Subcommittee recommends that the State party consider abolishing incommunicado detention and that, in the interim, it put in place the safeguards mentioned during the universal periodic review which have yet to be included in the Criminal Procedure Act. It also recommends that the State party take into account the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (the Beijing Rules) and, in particular, rule 67 of the United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty, which prohibits the application of incommunicado detention to juveniles between the ages of 16 and 18. C. Mechanical restraints 20. Article 45 of the Prison Act and article 72 of the Prison Regulations govern the use of coercive measures. They establish that such measures should be proportional and limited to situations where there is no lesser means of achieving the desired effect and should be applied for no longer than is strictly necessary. Over the course of its visit, the Subcommittee observed that all detention centres have security cells and that, as previously noted by the national preventive mechanism, the use of coercive measures, especially mechanical restraints, differs from one centre to the next. 21. In addition, the Subcommittee was informed that mechanical restraints and other coercive measures are used fairly frequently. In most of the centres of deprivation of liberty that it visited, there were individuals who were being subjected to restraints, including restraint beds. The Subcommittee is of the opinion that, before resorting to mechanical restraints, proper first- and secondary-stage preventive action should be taken by means of a tailored programme for each person and the early detection of crises that have the potential to lead to disruptive behaviour. GE.19-17184 5