159. Members of the Committee thanked the representatives of the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba for the comprehensive and interesting oral introductions to the reports of their Governments. 160. With regard to the Netherlands Antilles, questions were raised in respect of the legal structure of the country. It was asked, in particular, whether there was a clear separation between the jUdicial, executive and legislative branches and how the Queen of the Netherlands, who was responsible for appointing judges, was assisted in her task. In that connection, details regarding the status of jUdges and, in particular, of the Attorney-General were requested. It was also asked whether the Queen played the role of a constitutional council or a supreme court in the country. 161. Referring to article 2 of the Convention, members of the Committee welcomed the establishment in the Netherlands Antilles of the commission assigned to undertake a general review of the Criminal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure and wished to know more about its composition, its status and its programme of work. They wished to know also whether any violations of article 3 of the Constitution on the protection of nationals and foreigners had been recorded and how information on the prohibition of torture was disseminated. Concerning rules governing the interrogation of suspects, it was asked how long they could he held in pre-trial detention, by whom such detention could be ordered and what the rights of suspects were, in particular, with regard to informing their relatives of their detention and visits by a doctor and a lawyer. It was also inquired what the instructions to prison guards were in cases of riots and whether there was in the Netherlands Antilles a standing military force and, if so, what measures were taken to protect civilians from the military. 162. In respect of article 3 of the Convention, members of the Committee wished to know what the scope of the laws of the Netherlands Antilles on extradition was, especially with regard to non-refoulement, who the members of the commission that had been appointed to revise the Admission and Expulsion, Act were, and whether foreigners subject to extradition procedures could lod~ appeals and, if so, to whom. 163. Turning to article 4 of the Convention, members of the Committee st~essed the importance of a precise definition of torture in domestic law and its classification as a specific crime and requested information on the exa~t nature of the offences covered by the articles of the Crimipal Code of the Netherlands Antilles relating to torture. It was also asked whether the death penalty or corporal punishment applied in the country. 164. Members of the Committee also stressed the importance of the principle of universal jurisdiction, which was essential in order to guarantee the implementation of articles 5 and 7 of the Convention. In addition, they wished to know whether the Netherlands Antilles would take necessary measures to ensure the implementation of article 6, paragraph 1, of the Convention, what procedure was followed to institute proceedings in cases of criminal offences which fell within the jurisdiction of courts in the Netherlands Antilles and whether persons facing the death penalty could be extradited. -31-