A/69/44 Convention. In that regard, the Committee draws the State party’s attention to paragraphs 11 and 12 of the present concluding observations, which deal with the state of emergency in the southern border provinces as well as the three special laws currently in effect in Thailand. The Committee urges the State party to ensure that the application of martial law throughout Thailand does not, under any circumstances, contradict the rights guaranteed in the Convention. B. Positive aspects (5) The Committee welcomes the ratification by the State party of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, in 2008. (6) The Committee welcomes the following legislative measures taken by the State party in areas of relevance to the Convention, including the adoption of: (a) The Penal Code Amendment Act (Nos. 19 and 20), in 2007, and (No. 21), in (b) The Criminal Procedure Code Amendment Act (Nos. 25 and 26), in 2007; (c) The Domestic Violence Victim Protection Act, in 2007; (d) The Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act, in 2008; (e) The Juvenile and Family Court and Procedures Act, in 2010. 2008; (7) The Committee notes with appreciation the voluntary pledges and commitments made in the context of the universal periodic review that Thailand will amend its laws to bring them into line with the international human rights instruments, including ensuring that criminal laws are in line with the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The Committee also welcomes the invitation to the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment to visit the State party during this year. C. Principal subjects of concern and recommendations Declarations under articles 1, 4 and 5 of the Convention (8) The Committee is concerned about the interpretative declarations that the State party made at the time of accession to the Convention, on 2 October 2007, with regard to articles 1, 4 and 5 of the Convention, in which the State party declares that it will, inter alia, interpret the term “torture” in conformity with the Penal Code currently in force in the State party, which does not contain a definition of torture. The Committee notes that the State party had also declared at the time that it would “revise its domestic law to be more consistent with [articles 1, 4, and 5] of the Convention at the earliest opportunity” and that it had reiterated that commitment in its initial report (para. 60) as well as during the dialogue. The Committee further notes that, in its common core document, the State party indicated that a number of reservations made at the time of ratification to other human rights treaties had been withdrawn further to commitments it had made during the universal periodic review. Noting that the declarations raise questions as to the State party’s overall implementation of its treaty obligations, and appreciating the statement made by the representative of the State party that the possibility of withdrawal was being discussed, the Committee recommends that the State party consider withdrawing the declarations to articles 1, 4 and 5 of the Convention promptly so as to ensure it is in compliance with the requirements of the Convention and gives effect to all the provisions of the Convention. 150 GE.14-12596