CAT/OP/CRI/ROSP/1 11. The Subcommittee is concerned that the mechanism is understaffed, in that it lacks the multidisciplinary personnel it would need to carry out its work independently from the Ombudsman’s Office. Currently, the mechanism has to request the Office’s help in providing drivers, physicians, psychologists and other specialized workers in order to carry out its daily work. 12. The Subcommittee recommends that the State party continue ensuring the functional independence of the mechanism and that it provide the mechanism with sufficient human and financial resources to carry out its mandate. To support the important work of the mechanism, the Subcommittee recommends that the State party give more visibility to the mechanism’s reports and recommendations and that it ensure the involvement of senior government officials in the presentation of the mechanism’s annual reports. III. Legal and institutional framework for the prevention of torture and ill-treatment A. Classification of torture as an offence and obstacles to investigating cases of torture Definition and criminalization of torture 13. The Subcommittee expressed concern before members of the National Assembly that the definition of torture, as set out in article 123 bis of the Criminal Code, is not in line with article 1 of the Convention against Torture. In particular, article 123 bis does not specifically mention punishment, intimidation or coercion of a victim or a third person as possible purposes of inflicting torture. Furthermore, under article 1 of the Convention against Torture, torture is understood to be an act inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or a person acting in an official capacity. The Subcommittee does not take issue with broader domestic definitions of torture, so long as they contain, at a minimum, the elements of torture listed in the Convention.2 In the Costa Rican Criminal Code, torture does not specifically cover harm inflicted by persons acting in an official capacity or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official. The Criminal Code provides for a sentence of 3 to 10 years’ imprisonment for private individuals and a sentence of 5 to 12 years’ imprisonment for public officials who commit such acts. 14. The Subcommittee was informed that there had been just one conviction for torture in Costa Rica, despite the fact that the Constitutional Chamber recognized in at least five habeas corpus and amparo rulings that acts of torture and ill-treatment had been committed. 3 According to information provided by the Attorney General’s Office, injury caused to persons deprived of their liberty comes under the offence of abuse of authority; this was also pointed out by the Committee against Torture in 2008.4 The Subcommittee is concerned at the misuse of article 331 of the Criminal Code on the abuse of authority, as the legal interest protected by that article is the legality of administrative acts, not the dignity and physical and moral integrity of an individual. Besides that fundamental difference, the penalties to be applied vary greatly from one offence to another. 15. The Subcommittee recommends that the State party urgently undertake the legislative amendments necessary to bring the definition of the crime of torture into line with that established in the international treaties to which it is a party. The Subcommittee urges the State party to classify correctly the illegal acts carried out by public officials against persons deprived of their liberty or by third persons with the acquiescence or consent of public officials or at their instigation. 2 3 4 4 General comment No. 2 (2008) on the implementation of article 2 by States parties, para. 9. Rulings No. 000424-92; No. 07274-14; No. 012947-15; No. 003728-14; and No. 008376-17. CAT/C/CRI/CO/2, para. 12. GE.21-00153