CAT/C/BFA/CO/1 grave nature of acts of torture. The Committee continues, therefore, to be concerned by the existence of legal loopholes that allow a situation of impunity for acts of torture to continue, insofar as the bill has neither been adopted nor promulgated (arts. 1 and 4). The State party should step up its efforts to revise the country’s Criminal Code so as to make torture a separate offence. It should at the same time ensure that the definition of torture is consistent with the one set out in article 1 of the Convention. In the light of its general comment No. 2 (2008) on the implementation of article 2 by States parties, the Committee is of the view that if there are significant discrepancies between the definition of torture provided in domestic law and that found in the Convention, this may result in actual or potential loopholes for impunity. The State party should ensure that the penalties prescribed will be in proportion with the gravity of the acts committed. Absolute prohibition of torture 9. The Committee notes with concern that the law of the country does not absolutely prohibit torture under any and all circumstances and that acts of torture were reportedly committed during the sociopolitical crisis in 2011. It furthermore regrets that there are no legal provisions stating that there shall be no statute of limitations for the offence of torture (art. 2). The State party should enact legislation against torture so as to establish an absolute prohibition of torture, stating that no exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture. The State party should also establish that there shall be no statute of limitations for the offence of torture. Allegations of torture and ill-treatment 10. The Committee remains gravely concerned by reports that law enforcement officers have perpetrated acts of torture and ill-treatment either while questioning people at police or gendarmerie stations or during operations to quell peaceful demonstrations. The Committee remains concerned by the fact that several such acts have gone unpunished, as in the cases of David Idogo, Dié Kambou, Etienne Da, Moumouni Isaac Zongo and Ousseni Compaore. The Committee is also concerned by the absence of legal provisions establishing that statements or confessions obtained under torture are inadmissible in court, except when such a statement is invoked as evidence against a person accused of torture (arts. 2, 11, 15 and 16). The State party should: (a) Take immediate and effective action to prevent acts of torture and illtreatment and put an end to the impunity enjoyed by several of the alleged perpetrators of such acts. In this connection, it should promptly conduct thorough, independent and impartial investigations into all allegations of torture and illtreatment and prosecute the perpetrators of the aforementioned acts; (b) Make police and gendarmerie officers aware of the absolute prohibition of torture and of the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials; and (c) Ensure that a provision is included in the legislative amendments currently being introduced so that statements made as a result of coercion or torture may not be invoked as evidence in any court proceedings. The State party should make sure that judges are instructed and aware that it is unconstitutional to obtain statements through the use of torture, that such statements are inadmissible and that GE.14-40035 3