as specific cases of torture I their frequencYI the kind of officials involvedl the number of ~omplaints made, investigations undertaken and sentences handed down, with examples I cases in which compensation had been paid and the amount thereofl as well as information on the implementation of the principles of non-refou1ement and universal jurisdiction. Concludlag obs.ryations 127. In conclusion, and in view of the large number of questions raised, the Committee, pursuant to rule 67, paragraph 2, of its rules of procedure, requested the Government of Ecuador to submit to the Committee an additional report containing the information requested in accordance with the requirements of the Convention dnd the Committee's general guidelines. It also invited t~e Government of Ecuador to submit its additional report by the end of February 1991 in time for it to be considered at the sixth session of the Committee in April 1991. 128. The representative of Ecuador finally stated that he had taken note of the comments made by the Committee on his country's initial report and that his Government would be able to supply an additional report in accordance with tbe Committee's guidelines in time for the Committee's sixth session. OrllCI 129. The Committee considered the initial report of Greece (CAT/C/7/Add.8) at its 63rd and 64th meetings, held on 15 November 1991 (CAT/C/SR.63 and 64). 130. In his introduction to the report, the representative of the State party informed the Committee that the question of adherence to the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment had been recently submitted to the Greek Parliament. As soon as that instrument had been approved, Greece would be bound by all the international instruments aimed against torture. 131. The members of the Committee welcomed the report, which complied with the Committee's general guidelines and which was clear and informative on the de juri and de facto situation regarding the implementation of the Convention. They also welcomed the commitment of Greece to the eradication of torture, which was reflected, intlr aliA, by its acceptance of the optional provisions of articles 21 and ~2 of the Convention. They felt, however, that some additional information was needed on certain issues relating, in pArticular, to articles 10 to 13, 15 And 16 of the Convention. 132. Members of the Committee noted that the provisions of the Convention had been well incorporated into Greet legislation, but they wished to know more about their practical implementation in the country and about any problems which might have been e~countered in that respect. In that connection, they wished to receive details on persons actually convicted of torture before and after Greece had ratiCied the Convention. They also observed thet the Convention was not entirely self-executing and asked what steps had been taken under Greek law to ensure the implementation of provisions of the Convention, such AS those contained in its articles 4, 5, la and 11, which were not automatically applicable. In addition, further information ~as requested on the functions of judicial bodies, partiCUlarly the Prosecutors' Office, and -25-