205. As for article 14 of the Convention, the representative stated that Finnish legislation provided for compensation to be granted to torture victims, both for material damage caused and for pain inflicted. The current trend was towards a broad interpretation of the offence of torture for compensation purposes. 206. Referring to article 15 of the Convention, the representative stated that the witness who attended the interrogation at the request of the investigator or the person questioned was usually chosen from among members of the police forces. The presence of a witness during the interrogation was linked to the nature of the preliminary investigation. Any statement made out of court was in principle regarded as inadmissible unless confirmed in court. Any statement found to have been extracted under duress was dismissed as evidence. A decision to incorporate in the Code of Judicial Procedure an explicit provision making any deposition obtained through torture inadmissible would be a purely symbolic gesture since such depositions were never taken into account under the existing system based on the free assessment of evidence. Concluding observations 207. In conclusion, members of the Committee expressed the view that both the report and the dialogue established with the representatives of Finland had been extremely interesting and could serve as a model for other reporting States. They added that in the next periodic repott of Finland, clarifications would be desirable concerning the application of article 1 of the Convention, particularly the definition of torture under internal law; the application of articles 3 to 8, particularly the question of universal jurisdiction; the application of article 9, particularly the question of mutual judicial assistance between States parties and the application of article 15. Finally, they expressed the wish to receive the revised Penal Code of Finland as soon as it was ~dopted. 208. The representative of Finland assured the members of the Committee that due account would be taken of their comments in the preparation of his Government's next periodic report. 209. The initial report of Panama (CAT/C/5/Add.24) was considered by the Committee at its 75th and 76th meetings on 23 April 1991 (CAT/C/SR.75 and 76). 210. The report was introduced by the representative of the State party, who said that Panama, as a State party to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, had taken the legislative, administrative and jUdicial measures required to prevent acts of torture from being committed, in its territory and that his statement was aimed at supplementing his country's written report and giving the members of the Committee a clearer and more comprehensive idea of how Panama was implementing the Convention. 211. The representative explained that the reV1S1on of the Penal Code, which was currently under way, was based on two major principles: "non-imprisonment", to offset the negative effects of custodial penaltieG, and -38-