The Supreme Court of the Netherlands had the power of cassation in the Netherlands Antilles. Torture was not prohibited as such by the Constitution or by the Criminal Code of the Netherlands Antilles. However, certain provisions of the Constitution, the Criminal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure dealing with the protection of the person contained measures which included the prevention and punishment of acts of torture. A draft Code of Criminal Procedure was now before the Parliament of the Netherlands Antilles and the commission that had drafted it would soon embark upon a revision of the Criminal Code. In that rev~sion, consideration would be given to the need to introduce a provision whereby torture as such was expressly rendered punishable. In this connection, special attention would be given to universal jurisdiction in respect of torture and a study would be made to determine to what extent it was necessary to add the prohibition of torture in the Criminal Code. 157. Efforts were being made by the Netherlands Antilles to create and develop mechanisms for discharging obligations arising under treaties and statutes, and a number of priority measures had recently been taken to optimize the operation of the police force and to improve the prison system, and to exercise closer supervision over both. The Public Prosecutor's Office was required to examine every complaint concerning police behaviour, to condemn every form of torture and to institute criminal proceedings if torture occurred. Any interested party could file a suit with an independent court if the prosecution had not done its work properly. Victims of tortur9 were entitled to seek redress by suing the State for damages both under the Code of Criminal Procedure and in a civil action for tort. The Netherlands Antilles provided requesting States with judicial assistance even in the absence of a treaty and it was making every effort to meet its obligations under the Convention within the limits of its capabilities as a developing country. 158. The representative from Aruba noted that the legal and jUdicial structures of the island were almost the same as those of the Netherlands Antilles. While the Con~titution of Aruba did not expressly prohibit torture, it contained provisions under which torture would be considered a criminal offence. The relevant provisions of the Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure of Aruba were considered in accordance with the provisions of the Convention although they did not make explicit mention of torture. However, the Aruban Government had set up a special commission recently which was studying whether to establish torture as a criminal offence in a separate act or in a new article of the Penal Code. The recognition of universal jurisdiction in cases involving torture would also be considered. The Aruban Government was planning to enact legislation along more or less the same lines as the legislation of the Netherlands and would inform the Committee as soon as the new legislation had been adopted. Police Ordinances also formed an important part of Aruba's legal system and since 1986, when a national police force was established, new organs had been set up to settle matters relating to the police and the prison system. In the selection and training of both police and prison personn~1 increasing emphasis was being placed on proper behaviour, partiCUlarly in the treatment of prisoners. Special training programmes had also been introduced, and the new Prison Act that was under preparation would give prisoners the right to complain to a judge about their treatment by prison staff. -30-