PART 2: Procedures of the Human Rights Commitee and the Committee against Torture While such provisions operate to protect the sovereignty of the State concerned, they arguably do so at the cost of human rights protection and the eradication of torture.400 e) Submitting Information for an Article 20 Inquiry In submitting information designed to prompt an Article 20 inquiry, individuals or organisations must present credible information that signals the potential existence of systematic practices of torture in a State: the information should indicate that torture is “habitual, widespread and deliberate” and arises in “at least a considerable part of the territory in question”.401 It is not sufficient to present information on isolated instances of torture, though it is important to include a large number of concrete examples of torture. For instance, during its inquiry on the systematic use of torture in Peru, the CAT Committee received complaints amounting to 517 cases alleged to have occurred in the period between August 1988 and December 1997. Summaries of the complaints were then transmitted to the Government, with a request for information on them.402 Furthermore, an individual or organization should submit important background information on a State, such as (if relevant) a history of ethnic conflict and discrimination and the inadequacies of existing legislation, institutional frameworks and practices.403 In advance of an inquiry, persons should submit suggestions to the Committee on places that the relevant members should visit, as well as people that they should contact, such as government officials, torture victims, detainees, lawyers, and NGOs.404 If one is meeting with an inquiry team, one should tell one’s story succinctly and apolitically, and present copies of relevant documentation, if possible. One should address important points first in case time runs out. A written submission should be prepared to ensure that all points have been conveyed, even if one does run out of time during a face to face meeting.405 400 For example, Ahcene Boulesbaa states: “It is highly unlikely that States which practice torture will allow the Committee to inspect their places of detention and examine conditions of the prisoners who are alleged to have been tortured since they have the power of veto … the Committee is thereby denied access to the very evidence it needs to ascertain whether torture has or has not occurred”. Boulesbaa, A., The UN Convention on Torture and the Prospects for Enforcement, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers (1999), p. 265. 401 Giffard (2000), p. 98. 402 CAT Committee, Inquiry under Article 20, (2001) UN Doc. A/56/44 (SUPP), para. 153. 403 Giffard (2000), p. 98. 404 Ibid., pp. 74–75. 405 Ibid., p. 75. 133