The State party should ensure that all allegations of torture and ill-treatment are investigated promptly, effectively and impartially. It should also ensure that all acts of torture are punishable by appropriate penalties which take into account their grave nature, as set out in article 4, paragraph 2, of the Convention. Definition of torture (32) While noting the State party’s assertion that all acts that may be described as “torture” within the meaning of article 1 of the Convention are criminally punishable in China, the Committee reiterates its previous conclusions and recommendations (A/55/44, para. 123) that the State party has not incorporated in its domestic law a definition of torture that fully complies with the definition contained in the Convention. (33) The Committee is concerned that the provisions relating to torture refer only to physical abuse and do not include the infliction of severe mental pain or suffering. It is also concerned that article 247 of the Criminal Law, article 43 of the Criminal Procedure Law and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate Provisions on the Criteria for Filing Dereliction of Duty and Rights Infringement Criminal Cases restrict the prohibited practice of torture to the actions of judicial officers and officers of an institution of confinement and do not cover acts by “other persons acting in an official capacity”, including those acts that result from instigation, consent or acquiescence of a public official. Moreover, these provisions do not address the use of torture for purposes other than to extract confessions (art. 1). The State party should include in its legislation a definition of torture that covers all the elements contained in article 1 of the Convention, including discrimination of any kind. The State party should ensure that persons who are not judicial officers and officers of an institution of confinement, but who act in an official capacity or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official can be prosecuted for torture. The State party should also ensure that its legislation prohibits the use of torture for all intents and purposes. Death penalty cases and conditions of detention on death row (34) While noting that the State party has provided data on the large numbers of detainees serving death sentences, death sentences with a two-year reprieve, sentences for life imprisonment and imprisonment above five years, the Committee regrets that such data is not disaggregated according to the type of sentence and that specific data on death sentences is not publicly available according to article 3 of the Regulation on State Secrets and the specific scope of each level of secrets in the work of the People’s Procuratorates issued by the Supreme People’s Procuratorate. The Committee expresses concern at the conditions of detention of convicted prisoners on death row, in particular the use of shackles for 24 hours a day, amounting to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Moreover the Committee is concerned about the questions raised by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the question of torture (A/HRC/7/3/Add.1), on the removal of organs from persons sentenced to death without free and informed consent (arts. 11 and 16). The State party should review its legislation with a view to restricting the imposition of the death penalty. The State party should provide specific data on death penalty cases and ensure that all persons on death row are afforded the protection provided by the Convention. Forced medical treatment (35) While noting that article 18 of the Criminal Law allows a mentally ill person who has committed a crime but is not to bear any criminal responsibility for it to be given compulsory medical treatment by the authorities, the Committee also notes with concern that this provision has been misused to detain some people in psychiatric hospitals for reasons other than medical. The case of Hu Jing was raised by the Committee, but the State party has not provided a satisfactory answer (art. 11). The State party should take measures to ensure that no one is involuntarily placed in psychiatric institutions for reasons other than medical. Where hospitalization is required for medical reasons, the State party should ensure that it is decided only upon the advice of independent psychiatric experts and that such decisions can be appealed. 26