their role in preventing and punishing torture, on specific examples of criminal cases in which reference had been made to the European Convention on Human Rights, and on legal provisions establishing the right to individual petition under article 25 of that Convention. It was also asked whether there was any procedure that could lead to the dismissal of prosecutors and judges and how conflicts of opinion, if any, between authorities that could order the institution of criminal proceedings were resolved. 133. With reference to the information provided in the report on the period of the colonels' dictatorship in Greece, it was asked what measures had been taken to prosecute those responsible for torture or ill-treatment during that period, whether tha victims had received any form of compensation and whether it was still possible to prosecute persons for acts committed during the colonels' regime. 134. Referring to article 1 of the Convention, members of the Committee wondered whether the prohibition and elimination of torture as defined in the Convention were fully provided for by Greek law. In that connection, they expressed the wish to receive the full text of article 137 of the Greek Pen~l Code in order to clarify that point. 135. In connection with article 2 of the Convention, more information was requested on the duration and conditions of pre-trial detention. It was asted, in particular, which officials had the right to arrest and what ~~arantees the person arrested had during the period of custody, whether those responsible for breaches of the provisions governing pre-trial detention were criminally responsible, whether anyone had been prosecuted for such offences, what external or internal supervision was exercised over the actions of the police forces. how conditions of detention were monitored, what was meant by the terms "indictment division" and "correctional division", referred to in the report, and what legal measures had been taken to implement paragraph 3 of article 2 of the Convention. 136. With reference to article 3 of the Convention, members of the Committee sought clarification of the reasons for the broad interpretation given by Greet authorities to article 33 of the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, of administrative practices in that regard, and the number of foreigners who had been extradited in the past five years. They also asked how long an asylum-seeker was required to wait for a decision on his or her case and what living conditions were like during that time. 137. With regard to article 4 of the Convention, it was asked what the difference was, under article 6 of the Greek Constitution, between an offence and a crime and which legislative acts contained relevant lists or definitions; whether any persons guilty of torture had been prosecuted, convicted and punished; what were the contents of Act No. 1500/84 relating to the criminal punishment of persons guilty of torture; and why the penalties applicable to acts of torture ranged from five years' to life imprisonment. 138. On the subject of universal jurisdiction, members of the Committee wondered whether the implementation of articles 5 to 8 of the Convention was actually guaranteed under Greek law. They asked, in particular, whether a foreigner accused of having practised ill-treatment or tortute upon another foreigner in a foreign country could be prosecuted in Greek courts, whether -26-