A/HRC/13/39/Add.2 during the dictatorship, such as the former Minister of Foreign Affairs (1972–1976), Juan Carlos Blanco, aged 75, have been held for excessively long periods in pretrial detention. 94. In 2008 family members of a person who disappeared during the dictatorship challenged the constitutionality of the Expiration Law before the Supreme Court (recurso de inconstitucionalidad). The Supreme Court requested the executive branch and Congress to comment on the issue, and both indicated that they found the law to be unconstitutional. The Supreme Court is expected to take its final decision soon. However, the Court’s decision will be valid only for the one case, which means that for all other cases the Expiration Law continues to be valid.85 Thousands of signatures have been collected, and a referendum to declare certain articles of the Law void will be held in late 2009.86 95. Other measures taken by the Government include the publication of all available documentation regarding cases of disappearance which began during this period, and a draft law on reparation for victims of State terrorism, which is currently being discussed in Parliament.87 VI. Conclusions and recommendations A. Conclusions 96. The Government of Uruguay has come a long way in protecting and promoting human rights since the end of the dictatorship in 1985. The numerous international and regional human rights instruments which it has ratified, together with the national efforts to implement these instruments, including the establishment of the mandate of the Parliamentary Commissioner as well as the adoption of a law establishing a national human rights institution and an NPM under OPCAT are strong signals of the Government’s commitment in this matter. Despite these clear signs of the present Government’s intention to abide by international standards and to improve the respect and protection of prisoner’s rights, the penitentiary system seems to be close to collapse due to serious shortcomings in the general administration of criminal justice system. 97. The Special Rapporteur, although welcoming the efforts of the Government to criminalize torture in domestic criminal legislation, concludes that the provision on torture in the Law on Cooperation with the International Criminal Court is unlikely to be applied to perpetrators of individual crimes, as reflected by the total lack of application since its entry into force in 2006. However, it should serve as an inspiration for the reform of the Criminal Code, where a specific crime of torture should be included in line with article 4 CAT. 98. On the basis of discussions with public officials, judges, lawyers and representatives of civil society, interviews with victims of violence and with persons deprived of their liberty, often supported by forensic medical evidence, the Special Rapporteur found few reports of torture by the police during interrogation, but frequent allegations of ill-treatment in detention facilities. 85 86 87 GE.09-17655 In a decision dated 19 October 2009, adopted in the case Nibya Sabalsagaray, the Supreme Court declared the Expiration Law to be unconstitutional. Even though the decision is only valid for this case, it can be invoked by petitioners in other cases with similar conditions. The referendum did not reach the 50 per cent of votes required to declare the law void. On 18 September 2009, the Executive promulgated Law 18.596 on reparation to the victims of State terrorism. 21