victims of torture to receive moral and medical compensation and treatment for the injury they had suffered. 104. Replying to the questions raised with regard to the legal framework for the application of the Convention, the representative of the reporting State explained that international conventions applied throughout the federal territory of Argentina and provincial jurisdiction was transferred to the federal level. International instruments ratified by Argentina were directly applicable in the courts in the same way as domestic legislation and took precedence over it. In addition, he explained that, under new legislation, the system in force in the city of Cordoba, whereby lawyers could be present in police stations, would be extended to all parts of the country. He also indicated that the 1853 Constitution of Argentina fully guaranteed the rights of individuals and the freedoms of citizens. Its article 18 prohibited the use of ill-treatment and torture and plans to amend that text were in the early stages. Concerning the procedure for the appointment of judges, the representative informed the Committee that judges were nominated by the executive through the Ministry of Justice and appointed by agreement of the Senate. To strengthen that procedure, a Council for the Judiciary had been set up, composed of officials who took part in the appointment and dismissal of judges. Regarding the matter of national institutions established for the protection of human rights, the representative informed the Committee that two governmental bodies existed to which non-governmental organizations and citizens could make appeals in the event of alleged violations of human rights. One was the General Department of Human Rights and the Status of Women of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Worship and the other was the National Department of Human Rights of the Ministry of the Interior. Those two bodies could refer complaints to the courts. The report of the National Department of Human Rights of the Ministry of the Interior indicated that his Government was eager to conduct more efficient investigations of cases of unlawful coercion. 105. With reference to allegations of ill-treatment and torture reported by non-governmental organizations, the representative stated that he did not have the information necessary to provide a detailed reply. However, if Amnesty International had specific offences to denounce, it should apply to the appropriate authorities so that, if enough evidence could be collected to warrant a serious investigation, the cases would be followed up in the normal way and brought before the courts. He also indicated that his Government would reply in writing to the request for clarifications about the death of Sergio Gustavo Duran. In addition, he stated that the military personnel and police officers guilty of acts of torture at La Tablada in 1989 had been tried under ordinary law because the Defence of Democracy Act did not provide for penalties for such acts. As yet, not all sentences had been handed down and the Government of Argentina would communicate all relevant information to the Committee as soon as possible. 106. Concerning article 2 of the Convention, the representative referred to the new Code of Penal Procedure and explained that the Argentinian legal system had recently been thoroughly reorganized and that the relevant organization act had established a number of new courts. He also indicated that it had been necessary to proclaim a state of siege in the country on two occasions as a result of social tensions during the establishment of a fully democratic regime. The state of siege had not laster more than 30 days and only freedoms of assembly and movement had been restricted. The state of siege had been declared only in certain regions of the country and article 4, paragraph 2, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, prohibiting derogation from certain fundamental rights, had been fully respected. -20-