A/62/221 Higgins, the President and the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Fausto Pocar and Carla Del Ponte, and with the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Luis Moreno-Ocampo, to discuss issues of common concern. 40. On 20 June 2007, he met with staff of the Division of International Protection Services, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, in Geneva to discuss areas of cooperation and common concern. 41. With reference to General Assembly resolution 61/153, in which the Assembly stressed the need for the pursuance of cooperation with relevant United Nations programmes, notably the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme, with a view to enhancing further their effectiveness and cooperation on issues relating to torture, on 29 June 2007, consultations were held with relevant departments of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) in Vienna. III. The role of forensic expertise in combating impunity for torture 42. The Special Rapporteur has carried out fact-finding missions to eight countries since assuming the mandate in December 2004: Georgia, Mongolia, Nepal, China, Jordan, Paraguay, Nigeria and Togo. The common finding that emerged from each visit is the lack of accountability of perpetrators of torture, despite the fact that all eight are States parties to the Convention against Torture, which imposes a binding obligation to fight impunity. States are obliged to criminalize torture, as defined in article 1, by creating one or more specific offences in their domestic criminal codes punishable “by appropriate penalties which take into account their grave nature” (art. 4). 43. Although these States have a crime of torture in their domestic legislation, it is often poorly defined i.e. not in accordance with article 1, and even with ex officio powers of investigation authorities are reluctant to carry out criminal investigations into torture allegations; there is little, if any, evidence that any police official has been convicted of this offence. Instead, examples have been provided to the Special Rapporteur of administrative or disciplinary sanctions against errant officers. This is a strong indication of the unwillingness of States to fight impunity in accordance with the Convention. 44. The Special Rapporteur recalls the updated Set of Principles for the protection and promotion of human rights through action to combat impunity (E/CN.4/2005/102/Add.7). 1 According to principle 1 on the general obligations of States to take effective action to combat impunity: “Impunity arises from a failure by States to meet their obligations to investigate violations; to take appropriate measures in respect of the perpetrators, particularly in the area of justice, by ensuring that those suspected of criminal responsibility are prosecuted, tried and duly punished; to provide victims with effective remedies and to ensure that they receive __________________ 1 8 The updated Set of Principles was endorsed by the Commission on Human Rights in its resolution 2005/81. See Official Records of the Economic and Social Council, 2005, Supplement No. 3 (E/2005/23), chap. II, sect. A. 07-45686