47
129.
In addition, in its General Comments on Guatemala, issued in 2006, the
United Nations Committee against Torture voiced its concern regarding reports of women
being subjected to acts of sexual violence in police stations. It therefore stressed that the
State party should “take steps to ensure that all arrested women are brought immediately
before a judge and then transferred to a detention center for women, if so ordered by the
judge.” 164 This comment by the Committee against Torture shows how important effective
judicial oversight of detentions is as a mechanism for preventing torture and cruel,
inhuman, and degrading treatment.
130.
Worth noting, too, is the fact that, in its 2003 report on Argentina, the
United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention pointed out that a major cause for
concern was the lack of effective remedies against detention. Most of the detainees
interviewed by the Working Group said they had been placed in pre‐trial detention without
a proper hearing before a judge. They said they had simply been taken before a
“sumariante” (preliminary proceedings examining officer) or court clerk, who had ordered
pre‐trial detention by signing on behalf of the judge. According to the Working Group’s
report, detention orders are communicated to prisoners through the prison authorities,
without the accused being taken before a judge to be notified properly in person. 165
131.
For its part, in its 2010 Concluding Observations Report on Argentina, the
United Nations Human Rights Committee reiterated its concern regarding the detention by
police of persons, including minors, “whom they have not apprehended in the act of
committing an offense, and to do so without a warrant or subsequent judicial review, for
the sole stated purpose of verifying their identity.” On that subject, during his visit to
Buenos Aires province in 2010, the Rapporteur on the Rights of Persons Deprived of Liberty
met with several ombudspersons (Defensores Públicos) who stated that the detention of
children, for up to 12 hours without any judicial oversight, for the purpose of verifying their
identity, was a widespread practice in that part of the country.
132.
The IACHR emphasizes that the requirement that detention not be left to
the sole discretion of the state agents responsible for carrying it out is so fundamental that
it cannot be overlooked in any context. 166
164
United Nations, Committee against Torture, Consideration of Reports Submitted by State Parties
under Article 19 of the Convention, Conclusions and recommendations on Guatemala, CAT/C/GTM/CO/4, adopted
on July 25, 2006, para. 17.
165
United Nations, Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Report on Mission to Argentina,
E/CN.4/2004/3/Add.3, adopted on December 23, 2003, para. 37. On this visit, the Work Group was in the Federal
capital and the provinces of Buenos Aires, Mendoza and Salta, and held individual interviews, in private and
without witnesses with 205 detainees. With regard to the systematic application of preventive detention as a
policy of public security in the province of Buenos Aires, see, Center for Legal and Social Studies (CELS), Derechos
Humanos en Argentina Informe 2010, 2010, Ch. IV.
166
In this regard the Commission has said that “[w]here the procedures provided by law are not
followed – where arrest and detention are effectuated absent a judicial order, where detainees are not properly
registered, where they are held in facilities not authorized for detention or are transferred to detention facilities
absent judicial authorization – prompt judicial supervision is not possible, and the detainee is defenseless against
the potential abuse of his or her rights.” IACHR, Fifth Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Guatemala, Ch.
VII, para. 23.
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents