CAT/C/TUR/CO/4 to the police, in particular the expanded power to use firearms against demonstrators (arts. 2, 12, 13 and 16). 16. The State party should: (a) Ensure that prompt, impartial, and effective investigations are undertaken into all allegations relating to the excessive use of force by law enforcement officers and ensure that the perpetrators are prosecuted and the victims adequately compensated; (b) Increase its efforts to systematically provide training to all law enforcement officers on the use of force, especially in the context of demonstrations, taking due account of the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. Definition and criminalization of torture 17. Although the Criminal Code defines torture as a specific offence, the Committee notes that the definition set out in article 94 is incomplete inasmuch as it fails to mention the purpose of the act in question. There is also no specific mention of the act of torture carried out in order to intimidate, to coerce or to obtain information or a confession from a person other than the person who was tortured (art. 1). 18. The State party should align article 94 of the Criminal Code with article 1 of the Convention by: (a) identifying the motivating factors or reasons why torture is being inflicted; and (b) including in the definition acts intended to intimidate, coerce or obtain information or a confession from a person other than the victim. In this regard, the Committee recalls its general comment No. 2, which states that serious discrepancies between the Convention’s definition and the definition in a State party’s law create actual or potential loopholes that can foster impunity (see CAT/C/GC/2, para. 9). Fundamental legal safeguards 19. While taking note of the legal safeguards enshrined in Turkish legislation, the Committee is concerned at recent amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure, which give the police greater powers to detain individuals without judicial oversight during police custody. Placing suspects under constant video surveillance in their cells is another matter of concern (art. 2). 20. The State party should ensure that all detainees are afforded, by law and in practice, all fundamental safeguards from the very outset of their deprivation of liberty, including the right to be brought before a judge without delay. The State party should continue to install video surveillance in all areas of custody facilities where detainees may be present, except in cases in which detainees’ rights to privacy or to confidential communication with their lawyer or doctor may be violated. Such recordings should be kept in secure facilities and made available to investigators, detainees and lawyers. Enforced disappearances 21. The Committee is concerned at the “almost complete lack of accountability for cases of enforced disappearance” in the State party and its “palpable lack of interest [in] seriously investigating, prosecuting and adjudicating these cases”, as reported by the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances in its preliminary observations publicly 5