(a) Scatus of the Convention against Torture and Other Cr~al, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and reservations and declarations under the Convention (CAT/C/2/Rev.l)I (b) General guidelines re~arding the fo~ an4 cont~nts of initial reports to be submitted by States parties under article 19 of the Conventivn, adopted by the Committee at its third session (CAT/C/4/Rev.l). 56. The following sections, arranged on a country-by-country basis according to the sequence folloved by the Committee in its consideration of the reports, contain summaries based on the records of the meetings at which the reports were considered. More detailed info~ation is contained in the reports submitted by the States parti~~ and in the summary records of the relevant meetings of the Committee. Spain 57. The C~mmittee considered the initial report of Spain (CAT/C/5/Add.21) at its 59th and 60th meetings, held on 13 November 1990 (CAT/C/SR.59 and 60). 58. Members of the Committee expressed their appreciation of the Spanish Governmont's cooperation with regard to the implementation of the Convention and welcomed the precis. and interesting report it had submitted. They observed, however, that the report contained little reference to the way in whAch the Spanish legal system actually functioned or to any problems that might have arisen in connection with the implementation of the Convention and requested further information in that regard. 59. Noting that the Constitution of Spain provided for the incorporation of international treaties into internal law, m~mbers of the Committee wished to know, in particular, which provisions of the Convention could be automatically applied by the ~ourts and which could not be so applied. Furthe~ore, with refer~nce to Spanish legislation concerning pre-trial detention, it was asked whether only the judicial police could make arrests or whether the National Police and the Civil Guard could also do so a~d which of these authQrities actually held detainees in custody. Noting also that, according to the Code of Criminal Procedure, notice of an arrest had to be given to the judicial authority or public prosecutor within 24 hours, members asked whether the detainee was placed at the disposal of the judicial authorities when that period had expired. 60. Generally, members of the Committee felt that more information was necessary to understand how the system of criminal p£ocedure worked in Spanish law and to clarify how incommunicado detention was regulated. Further information was necessary also about the appointment, the legal status and the functions of the Parliamentary Commissioner and about his recent reports on allegations of torture and ill-treatmtint in places of detention. In addition, members of the Committee asked whether, in Spanish law, habeas corpus could be invoked in the case of a detention ordered by a judge; how appeals for amparo to the Constitutional Court, as referred to in the report, applied in pra~tice; what effects a judgement by the Constitutional Court had in a case involving torture; and why the comretent court to try offences committed by members of the National Police and the Civil Guard was the Provincial Court itself, and not a court of first instance. -13-