Source: United Nations – Geneva
The Committee against Torture today concluded its consideration of the eighth periodic report of Turkmenistan, with Committee Experts commending the State for installing cameras in places of detention, while raising questions about measures taken to prevent torture in prisons and the treatment of homosexual persons.
Liu Huawen, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, welcomed that Turkmenistan said it placed high value on human beings, protecting their liberty and fundamental freedoms, and that it had adopted national action plans for protecting human rights, gender equality and children’s rights, and implemented measures to prevent child labour. It was also commendable that video cameras had been installed in places of detention. Mr. Liu asked questions relating to the operation of these cameras.
Todd Buchwald, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, asked what measures were in place to ensure that legal safeguards against torture were implemented in practice? Did the State’s laws ensure that medical examinations were independent and conducted within 24 hours of admission into detention centres? Did all detained persons have the right to challenge their detention? Were all detentions recorded in registers and were there limitations on access to registers? What measures were in place to ensure that detained persons were informed about the reasons for their arrest promptly in a language they understood both orally and in writing?
Mr. Liu said homosexuality remained criminalised in the State party, with up to two years in prison for consensual same sex relations. Were there any investigations or prosecutions for consensual same sex conduct? United Nations treaty bodies had repeatedly recommended that the State party repeal this legislation; had any action been taken to implement these recommendations? There had been reports that people who spoke out about issues relating to homosexuality were at risk of being arrested and tortured and that homosexual prisoners were subject to humiliating anal examinations. Could the delegation comment on these reports? What measures would be taken to guarantee the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons?
The delegation said Turkmenistan took measures to prevent acts of torture and harsh treatment across its territory. Over the reporting period, it had invested around 14 million United States dollars in construction and repair work for prisons, medical equipment, and training for staff. In 2023, the number of convicts fell by 4.5 per cent compared to the previous year, and by a further three per cent in 2024, facilitated by measures taken to provide alternatives to custodial sentences, including parole and commuted sentences. The occupancy rate in the State’s prisons was 83 per cent. Food, medical and hygiene supplies were provided to inmates to ensure their health at the cost of the State.
The delegation said the State recognised human rights but there were certain specific aspects on which they would follow their own line. Regarding the allegations of torture and ill-treatment against homosexuals, there had been no such allegations recorded. If specific details could be provided, more specific information could be provided.
Introducing the report, Vepa Hajiyev, Permanent Representative of Turkmenistan to the United Nations Office at Geneva and head of the delegation, said a new edition of the Criminal Code, which entered into force in January 2023, included a definition of torture that was fully aligned with article 1 of the Convention. The Code established criminal liability for acts of torture and explicitly excluded any justification for such acts, including references to orders, exceptional circumstances, or threats to security. Turkmenistan had established the absolute prohibition of torture, as required by international law.
In closing remarks, Claude Heller, Committee Chair, said the Committee would highlight several priority recommendations within the concluding observations. The Committee hoped to continue an open, ongoing dialogue with the State party.
In his concluding remarks, Mr. Hajiyev expressed gratitude to the Committee for having the opportunity to present the report. Thanks to the open dialogue over the last two days, members of the delegation had identified priority areas to focus on. There was a need to review the State’s legislation to ensure it was fully aligned with the main provisions of the Convention.
The delegation of Turkmenistan consisted of representatives from the Supreme Court; Prosecutor General’s Office; Ministry of Internal Affairs; Ministry of Justice; Institute of State, Law and Democracy of Turkmenistan; and the Permanent Mission of Turkmenistan to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The Committee will issue concluding observations on the report of Turkmenistan at the end of its eighty-second session on 2 May. Those, and other documents relating to the Committee’s work, including reports submitted by States parties, will be available on the session’s webpage. Summaries of the public meetings of the Committee can be found here, and webcasts of the public meetings can be found here.
The Committee will next meet in public on Friday, 25 April at 3 p.m. to continue its consideration of the seventh periodic report of Ukraine (CAT/C/UKR/7).
Report
The Committee has before it the third periodic report of Turkmenistan (CAT/C/TKM/3).
Presentation of Report
VEPA HAJIYEV, Permanent Representative of Turkmenistan to the United Nations Office at Geneva and head of the delegation, said that following the review of Turkmenistan’s second periodic report by the Committee, the State party had developed an action plan for the implementation of the Committee’s recommendations. Some 50 subparagraphs of the Committee’s concluding observations had been fully or partially implemented; and 16 were currently being implemented.
State, law enforcement, and civil society institutions were carrying out practical efforts to prevent conditions that could lead to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. The State was implementing national action plans on human rights, gender equality and children’s rights, and against corruption and trafficking, which had specific goals and objectives and indicators for evaluating the results attained.
A new edition of the Criminal Code, which entered into force in January 2023, included a definition of torture that was fully aligned with article 1 of the Convention. The Code established criminal liability for acts of torture and explicitly excluded any justification for such acts, including references to orders, exceptional circumstances, or threats to security. Turkmenistan had established the absolute prohibition of torture, as required by international law.
In recent years, Turkmenistan had been implementing measures to strengthen the institutional capacity of the Ombudsman. In 2024, new departments were created within the Ombudsman’s Office and the number of staff increased. Amendments made in 2024 to the law on the Ombudsman enhanced the Ombudsman’s ability to restore violated rights and broadened the scope for applying preventive measures. The Ombudsman’s Office continued to closely cooperate with international organizations to bring its mandate fully in line with the Paris Principles and was developing a roadmap for upgrading its status to category “A”.
Turkmenistan had undertaken a comprehensive set of reforms aimed at improving the judicial system and enhancing the quality of justice. The State Concept for the Development of the Judicial System for 2022-2028 aimed to improve the legislative framework governing the functioning of the courts, the qualifications of judicial system personnel, and the material and technical infrastructure of the courts, as well as expand international legal cooperation. In April 2025, a new edition of the law on the judiciary was adopted, which incorporated key international standards related to the independence and competence of judges, as well as measures aimed at enhancing the efficiency of the courts.
To modernise and standardise the process of professional development for judges and judicial staff, a new procedure for organising and conducting relevant training activities was approved in 2023. Turkmenistan was also implementing a phased digitalisation of its judiciary to enhance transparency, facilitating video and audio recording of court proceedings and digital access to judicial information and services. Between 2020 and 2025, lawyers provided legal assistance in 530 cases of detention where unlawful actions falling under the scope of the Convention were identified.
In line with the Committee’s concluding observations, internal regulations governing conditions of detention had been introduced. These rules covered living conditions, medical care, and the rights to phone calls, visits, walks, and to receive parcels. Particular attention was paid to medical supervision and the documentation of physical injuries. Every individual admitted to a penitentiary facility underwent a mandatory medical examination. Any injuries discovered were documented, and in cases where violence was suspected, an additional investigation was carried out.
Between 2020 and 2023, large-scale reconstruction and capital repairs were carried out in 12 penitentiary institutions. These efforts aimed to bring detention conditions in line with the Mandela Rules. Monitoring visits by the Ombudsman and Public Monitoring Commissions were regularly organised – a total of 20 visits to places of detention were conducted in 2023-2024 alone.
Criminal procedural legislation explicitly prohibited the use of evidence obtained through torture, threats, deception, or cruel treatment. All institutions under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Internal Affairs had implemented the practice of video recording interrogations to ensure transparency and help prevent potential abuses.
The Criminal Code provided for liability for violent acts within the household. A national survey was conducted in cooperation with the United Nations Population Fund on domestic violence against women, and based on its findings, a roadmap for the prevention of domestic violence for 2022–2025 was developed. The State aimed to introduce clear definitions, establish penalties, and create comprehensive protection mechanisms for vulnerable groups, including conducting awareness-raising campaigns. Human rights education and the prevention of torture were integral components of the training of law enforcement personnel.
A cooperation plan between the Government and the International Committee of the Red Cross Representation for 2025 had been approved, which included seminars and lectures on international standards of law enforcement for relevant agency personnel, and awareness-raising initiatives on international norms related to the treatment of persons deprived of liberty and to penitentiary standards. Discussions were ongoing on the possible organization of visits to places of detention by the International Committee of the Red Cross. Direct contact had also been established since 2024 with Human Rights Watch and other human rights organizations.
Questions by Committee Experts
TODD BUCHWALD, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, said there were reports of numerous enforced disappearances in Turkmenistan, the victims of which remained behind bars without access to family members. There were 162 reports of such disappearances by the Prove-They-Are-Alive campaign, including 29 persons who had died in custody. There were also reports of cruel treatment of detainees, lack of independence of the judiciary, harassment of journalists and human rights defenders, and a culture of impunity. Did the State have sufficient mechanisms to identify torture and ill-treatment? What had the State party done to investigate the 162 reported cases of enforced disappearance?
What measures were in place to ensure that legal safeguards against torture were implemented in practice? Did the State’s laws ensure that medical examinations were independent and conducted within 24 hours of admission into detention centres? Did all detained persons have the right to challenge their detention? Were all detentions recorded in registers and were there limitations on access to registers? What measures were in place to ensure that detained persons were informed about the reasons for their arrest promptly in a language they understood both orally and in writing?
In which circumstances did the right to free legal assistance for accused persons apply? There were cases in which accused persons had reportedly struggled to obtain legal representation. How did the State ensure that lawyers were not dissuaded from representing clients seen as controversial, and that lawyers were well-trained and independent? There were reports of closed trials; what legal rules governed such trials? Was the right to immediately inform family members of detention provided in law and in practice? Were officers that failed to provide these safeguards punished? How many complaints had been received related to the lack of provision of safeguards and what investigations had been carried out in response?
Turkmenistan remained largely closed to international scrutiny. It had issued a standing invitation to special procedures in 2018 but had not accepted all but one of the 15 requests for visits received since, and the one visit that was accepted had not yet been carried out. How would the State party improve cooperation with special procedures? Did the International Committee of the Red Cross have access to places of deprivation of liberty? How many meetings between representatives of international organizations and detained persons had been held in the last three years, and how were such persons protected from reprisals?
What was the Government doing to ratify the Optional Protocol and to accept the Committee’s jurisdiction to receive individual communications? What awareness raising campaigns was the State party carrying out regarding the Committee’s concluding observations? Were translated versions of the concluding observations published online? The State had not provided data in response to several of the questions posed by the Committee in the list of issues. What measures were in place to develop the State’s capacities in data collection?
There were concerns that the Ombudsman’s Office lacked independence and had not taken steps to address torture and ill-treatment. Its reports failed to adequately address human rights violations, and it had not submitted a report to the Committee before the dialogue. What was the State party doing to strengthen the mandate of the Ombudsman’s Office to investigate human rights violations? The Office had no mandate to conduct visits to places of detention; would such a mandate be established? Did the Ombudsman require prior permission to conduct such visits?
Complaints from individuals could only be considered by the Ombudsman within one year, eliminating the possibility of investigating historical crimes. Would this rule be eliminated? What measures were in place to ensure that complaints submitted to the Ombudsman were kept confidential? There had been few appeals to the Ombudsman’s Office by persons deprived of liberty; why was this? Had the Office recommended ratifying international human rights treaties and facilitating visits by special procedures? How many times had the Ombudsman concluded that there had been a human rights violation and what actions were taken in response?
Turkmenistan had not granted asylum to any person since 2005. How was the State party strengthening its asylum procedures? Did it cooperate with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees? Persons unable to document their lack of nationality were denied statelessness status. Was the State party working to address this issue?
Mr. Buchwald cited reports of prison staff torturing prisoners, including by beating a man to death with a soldering iron, denying an ill prisoner medical treatment, and torturing a man with an electric current. How did the State party prevent torture in detention and investigate all reported cases? There were also reports of forcible transfers of critics of the State living abroad to Turkmenistan, where they were subjected to abuse and enforced disappearance, and of travel bans imposed on activists who opposed the Government. How would the State party guarantee activists’ safety and right to travel?
LIU HUAWEN, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, welcomed that the State said it placed high value on human beings, protecting their liberty and fundamental freedoms, and that it had adopted national action plans for protecting human rights, gender equality and children’s rights, and implemented measures to prevent child labour.
The Committee also welcomed the training activities carried out for the police. However, there was no mechanism for assessing the effectiveness of this training. Was training mandatory and how many personnel had participated? It was commendable that annual training was provided for judges of the Supreme Court. What training was provided for judicial personnel in other courts and medical personnel involved in the treatment of detainees? Did such training address the revised Istanbul Protocol?
The Committee was concerned by the absence of guidelines on the prohibition of torture in the healthcare sector? Would such guidelines be developed? Were there ongoing training programmes on the prohibition of torture for police officers and prison staff? Were international personnel involved in the design and presentation of this training?
It was commendable that video cameras had been installed in places of detention. What percentage of places of deprivation of liberty had been equipped? Were all interrogations recorded? Were there consequences for failing to record interrogations? Were there limitations on access to recordings by detained persons and their lawyers?
How many persons were detained in Turkmenistan’s prisons and for what period of time? What efforts were underway to expand alternatives to detention? There were reports that prisons held nearly three times their capacity, and that Turkmenistan had the fourth highest incarceration rate globally. What steps had been taken to reduce occupancy rates?
There were reports of failures to provide timely medical examinations and delays in isolating prisoners with tuberculosis, which increased the risk of spread of the disease. Prisoners reportedly needed to pay for medications that should be provided for free. Some detainees went months without being provided access to leisure facilities within prisons. Could the delegation comment on these issues?
Persons could reportedly be placed in solitary confinement for up to three months, left in total darkness with a lack of access to water or basic hygiene. How was the use of solitary confinement documented and regulated? Had measures been taken to gradually end the use of prolonged solitary confinement, which was reportedly used as a tool of repression against political prisoners? What rules governed visitation rights and phone calls for persons in solitary confinement?
How did the State party ensure that meetings between lawyers and remand prisoners were private? Were there provisions prohibiting the interrogation of suspects before lawyers were present? Could refusals to give testimony be used against detainees in court?
The Committee called for data on inter-prisoner violence and deaths in custody, and investigations into such cases. How did the State party ensure that family members could request independent autopsies of deaths in custody and that victims of violence in prisons could report the incident? Police officers had the right to use physical force to protect the rights and freedoms of citizens and prevent “socially dangerous acts” under State law. This law seemed exceedingly broad. Did it apply to the use of firearms? Were there more specific rules governing the use of force? What investigations had been carried out into excessive use of force by the police and what were their outcomes?
There were reports that patients in psychiatric facilities were abused by staff. What measures were in place to improve complaints mechanisms in such facilities? How did the State party oversee involuntary hospitalisations? In how many cases had restraints been used in psychiatric facilities, and what types of restraints were used?
How did the State party ensure that appropriate support services were provided to victims of torture? What measures were in place to provide redress, compensation and rehabilitation to victims?
The Committee welcomed the criminalisation of corporal punishment in all settings and measures taken to protect children from violence, including the appointment of inspectors specialising in violence against children. How many cases had they investigated? The Committee also welcomed the establishment of juvenile courts. How many cases had they assessed? What measures were in place to prevent the detention of juveniles?
Gender-based violence had not been established as a separate crime in the Criminal Code, though there were many cases of gender-based violence in the State. Had the roadmap developed to prevent gender-based violence been published online? What progress had been made in implementing it? What were the obstacles to adopting a law on gender-based violence? How did the State party evaluate its awareness raising activities on gender-based violence? Were victims support services in place? How many shelters for victims and hotlines for reporting violence had been established?
High school girls were reportedly subjected to forced virginity tests, and information on girls found to have had sexual relations was reportedly passed to police. How did the State party prevent this practice?
Other Committee Experts asked questions on the national action plan on countering terrorism and the international organizations the State party partnered with to implement the plan; how legal safeguards were ensured for persons suspected of terrorism; the number of convictions imposed under anti-terrorism legislation; reforms adopted to align the legislative framework on terrorism with the State’s international obligations; the number of juveniles, particularly girls, currently in detention and the conditions in which they were held; measures to prevent overcrowding and ensure access to healthcare in prisons; and complaints and monitoring mechanisms in place for juvenile detention.
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said Turkmenistan took measures to prevent acts of torture and harsh treatment across its territory. Over the reporting period, it had invested around 14 million United States dollars in construction and repair work for prisons, bought medical equipment, and ensured training for staff. In 2023, the number of convicts fell by four and a half per cent compared to the previous year, and by a further three per cent in 2024, facilitated by measures taken to provide alternatives to custodial sentences, including parole and commuted sentences.
The occupancy rate in the State’s prisons was 83 per cent. Food, medical and hygiene supplies were provided to inmates to ensure their health at the cost of the State. Allegations of infected inmates not being separated from other inmates were unfounded; such inmates were transferred to prison hospitals for treatment. The State had examined eight complaints from prisoners in 2023 and five in 2024, finding no wrongdoing by State officials in each case. Regular training sessions were organised for prison staff, which addressed basic standards for treating inmates. Over 2,000 training sessions were carried out between 2022 and 2024.
Turkmenistan had continued to develop its legislation on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Between 2022 and 2024, orders were issued on strengthening supervisory work on places of deprivation of liberty and on creating a special body for regulating medical examinations in prisons.
The Ombudsman’s Office had access to all places of deprivation of liberty and did not need prior permission to conduct visits. It verified the sanitary norms of establishments, the right to food and healthcare, and the right to visits and to receive parcels from family members. The Office had issued recommendations on improving detention facilities and healthcare services in prisons that the Government was working to implement. No complaints had been received by the Ombudsman on the lack of provision of parole, or from inmates in detention centres for women or juveniles.
Work had been undertaken to ensure that police stations and remand prisons were equipped with audio-visual recording devices. Access to recordings was given to the Ombudsman and legal counsel.
The national action plan on gender equality for 2021-2025 included measures to combat gender-based violence against women and girls, including domestic violence. A survey conducted by the State showed that some 12 per cent of women in Turkmenistan had been subjected to domestic violence. A roadmap to implement the survey’s recommendations had been developed, which included plans to develop a rapid response mechanism for domestic violence.
The State had established a pilot system of family support centres where social workers provided support for victims of violence; this would soon be expanded. There were also hotlines that victims could use to report violence. The Government was studying legislation on domestic violence in other countries with a view to developing such legislation domestically.
The delegation said Turkmenistan regularly provided information on individual cases to various United Nations structures. Turkmenistan had given information concerning individuals to certain countries, and special procedures had closed these cases. The State would continue to provide information to the special procedures and other interested parties. There was no special complaints mechanism for cases of cruel or inhumane treatment, but a complaint could be submitted to authorities of law enforcement via writing or in person. The Special Prosecutor visited places of detention to monitor the work of the penitentiary institutions.
According to the Criminal Code, the diagnosis of an illness could be a ground for early release, and a decision would be taken by a court. The delegation cited several cases, including one prisoner who in 2017 was convicted of smuggling psychoactive substances, and was pardoned in 2020. Three years later, another criminal case was initiated against him, after which he was placed on a wanted list. He hid in a mountainous area for some time without food and medication, surviving on psychoactive substances. When he was detained, he already had multiple forms of bodily harm, developed during his time in the mountains, and he died three days after he was detained due to an overdose from psychoactive substances. Evidence that his cause of death was bodily harm due to torture was not true and this had been confirmed by the forensic investigation. Turkmenistan’s actions throughout all cases had been aimed at protecting its citizens.
The memorandum on humanitarian visits had not yet been signed, as negotiations had been interrupted six years ago. In 2024, the Turkmen side took the initiative to discuss the text again and was waiting to hear from the International Criminal Court. The State was ready to consider requests from the International Criminal Court to visit places of detention.
Immediately after the appeal of the High Commissioner for Refugees to grant asylum to citizens of Afghanistan, Turkmenistan as a neighbouring country expressed willingness to make all resources available to facilitate transport to third countries. About 150 Afghan citizens received temporary visas while they awaited permission to move to other countries. A person had the right to continue to stay in the country until their status was determined officially, whether this was a stateless person, or an individual of another country. During the COVID-19 pandemic, amendments were made to the law on migration which provided for the option to extend the validity of passports in emergency situations. A passport could only be renewed twice and only in extraordinary legal circumstances.
Not all countries of the world had the practice of issuing passports abroad, as this required significant resources and would become an additional burden on the State. Primary requests to obtain a passport abroad could be submitted electronically. The Government was looking to simplify the procedure for issuing passports.
Solitary confinement was only meted out to prisoners for intentional violations and measures. Training courses regarding torture and solitary confinement were provided to the Ministry of Interior staff. A learning course had been started for the doctors working in the penitentiary system to update their knowledge of tuberculosis and treatment. Medical units were present within each penitentiary establishment. The treatment plan for the multi-drug-resistant tuberculosis was fully functioning. Work was ongoing to deal with cases of tuberculosis, and penitentiary administrations were responsible for ensuring the good health of convicts.
Last month, a monitoring visit had been conducted to see seven Turkish prisoners serving sentences in Turkmenistan. There was only one establishment for juvenile offenders, and the occupancy rate was 22 per cent of its total capacity. Juvenile female offenders were held separately from male offenders.
Turkmenistan had successfully implemented a national strategy to prevent violent extremism and combat terrorism and was preparing the new strategy for 2025-2030.
Around 94 court rooms had audio and video cameras, representing more than 90 per cent of courtrooms in the country. This work on the digitalisation of courts was continuing. The accused had the right to view all documents related to the case, including documents and video recordings. Relevant work was carried out to implement the provisions of the Convention. The new version of the Criminal Code entered into force in January 2023 and punishment for certain crimes had been reduced.
All courts in Turkmenistan had special rooms for minors, increasing their protection. A new provision had been introduced, in which a minor committing an offence for the first time, providing it was a medium offence or below, would not be imprisoned. There had been a drop in the numbers of minors imprisoned by 35 per cent in 2024, compared to 2020, as a result.
According to the Criminal Code, data should not be considered admissible in court if acquired through violations of the law, including torture, violence or threat. Courts now had specialised judges on family matters to ensure the best interests of children. A lawyer was available from the moment of detention or indictment. In the event of remand of a minor, or a person with a disability, there were specific provisions. Use of an interpreter could be requested.
In each case of detention, a notification was sent in writing to the Office of the Public Prosecutor, within 24 hours from the moment of detention. The Office of the Public Prosecutor had the right to cancel an unlawful detention. Without the authorisation of the Public Prosecutor, a detainee needed to be released after 24 hours, with the arrest communicated to close relatives.
Disciplinary measures were taken against staff and other officials who breached guaranteed safeguards. The Code of Criminal Procedure was in keeping with international treaties, which meant there were guarantees to safeguard the rights of the accused.
To date, Turkmenistan had two national action plans on combatting human trafficking. The penalty for this crime had been strengthened to between 15 to 20 years in prison. A Commission on Combatting Human Trafficking had been established in Turkmenistan, which included 13 State bodies working on this issue. In July 2024, the first meeting of the Commission was held. The Commission was tasked with ensuring the implementation of the national action plan, including through prevention, protection, and prosecution, providing assistance to victims, and carrying out awareness raising events. The national action plan 2020-2025 was adopted by a decree.
The Ministry of Justice provided support to the Bar Association of the country. There were six associations of lawyers in Turkmenistan. Over the last four years, lawyers in Turkmenistan had participated in 48 training sessions on human rights and had carried out more than 3,000 visits to places to detention. A conference had taken place where participants from many countries exchanged views on how to better protect lawyers. The State stood ready to continue work in the legal area, promote a legal culture, and strengthen international cooperation.
There had been no complaints recorded about forced virginity tests, but the delegation would look into any case if information was provided. In certain cases, law enforcement bodies could ask for medical tests to be carried out in the framework of existing legislation. A roadmap had been developed for the ratification of the Optional Protocol and work was ongoing in this respect.
Questions by Committee Experts
TODD BUCHWALD, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, said many bodies and individuals had made allegations, which the State party had denied. The bodies making these allegations were highly credible. The Committee recommended the ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Convention as a critical step for the State party, as well as having a regular relationship with the International Criminal Court. Were the recommendations from Committees made available in all major newspapers?
The Ombudsman had not received any complaints which was concerning. Did this suggest a need to deal more assertively with the problem? It was positive that the Ombudsman had access to all places of deprivation of liberty; however, it was inferred that she had not visited some facilities. Was this correct? Was it possible to share the data responsive to the Committee’s list of issues? There was data available on overcrowding, so it would be helpful to provide disaggregated data split by facility.
How was it determined whether information published by journalists was true, accurate or impartial? What were the penalties for publishing information which was determined not to fall under this category? What were the prospects for revising the law so there would be no statute of limitations for the crime of torture?
LIU HUAWEN, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, said there had been progress in the field of family law. Today, domestic violence was not a matter of private law, but a focus of public law. Marriage and family membership should not deprive any person of her or his basic human rights.
Turkmenistan’s strict abortion restrictions could create a cruel, inhumane or degrading environment for women, with abortion banned after five weeks, which was before many women realised they were pregnant. Reproductive health care was limited, forcing women towards unsafe methods which endangered their health and lives. These laws contributed to preventable maternal deaths and increased health risks. It was regretful that Turkmenistan did not provide access to emergency contraceptives.
The Committee suggested that the State party align its legal framework with international standards. Would the State party take concrete steps to ensure access to safe abortion nation-wide and to reduce teenage pregnancies, including by providing access to contraceptives and reproductive services? Would the State ensure that doctors and medical professionals provided safe abortions for women whose lives were at risk due to pregnancy?
Homosexuality remained criminalised in the State party, with up to two years in prison for consensual same sex relations. Were there any investigations or prosecutions for consensual same sex conduct? United Nations treaty bodies had repeatedly recommended that the State party repeal this legislation; had any action been taken to implement these recommendations? There had been reports that people who spoke out about issues relating to homosexuality were at risk of being arrested and tortured and that homosexual prisoners were subject to humiliating anal examinations. Could the delegation comment on these reports?
What measures would be taken to guarantee the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons? Would the State party provide systematic training for law enforcement officers, police officers and members of the judiciary on human rights standards for gender and sexual identity orientation?
As a neutral country, Turkmenistan could play a more constructive and unique role in international cooperation. It was hoped Turkmenistan would make a greater contribution to global governance, including through the effective implementation of the Convention.
A Committee Expert asked if there was monitoring of places of deprivation of liberty where minors were held? Who carried out this monitoring activity?
Another Expert asked about the legislation to combat terrorism; could more specific information be provided?
Responses by the Delegation
The delegation said cooperation was something which Turkmenistan needed to improve. The State party worked with various international organizations and human rights committees in Geneva. All decisions and conclusions voiced within the Committee needed to be based on established and recognised standards. Often the opinions of law enforcement bodies were interpreted objectively, and the State was trying to bridge the gap by involving representatives of civil society to enable human rights organizations to better understand the individual cases. There was a clear imbalance of information, and the State was doing its best to address this. The State did not plan the official publication of results of the Committee’s recommendations, but if others wished to publish them, they could do so.
The Ombudsperson visited prisons, but it was important to enhance the capacities of the institution to ensure it had greater access to places of detention. The State recognised human rights but there were certain specific aspects on which they would follow their own line. Regarding the allegations of torture and ill-treatment against homosexuals, there had been no such allegations recorded. If specific details could be provided, more specific information could be provided.
As a neutral state, Turkmenistan was working to advocate for the values of peace and trust to ensure the Sustainable Development Goals were met.
Currently, Turkmenistan was a party to the 19 legal instruments combatting terrorism. The law on combatting terrorism included legal protection of citizens for their participation in combatting terrorism. The State had extensive levels of cooperation in this area. There were no issues of overcrowding in prisons. The State rejected allegations that there had been an increase in the number of minors detained. There had been single cases, which did not represent a serious problem in the country. Institutions for minors serving sentences functioning under the auspices of the Ministry of Interior were monitored by the Ombudsman and other institutions.
Turkmenistan worked closely with the counterterrorism mechanism of the United Nations. A seminar had been held in Doha about the spread of terrorist ideas through the internet.
Women had the permission to interrupt pregnancies after the established timeframe, but this was based on an individual approach, relating to specific circumstances. Having abortions outside of medical institutions involved serious risks to the health of women. To prevent illegal abortions, there were special provisions in the law of responsibility. Written agreement was required from parents only if the girl was under the age of 18.
In 2023, the General Prosecutor’s Office of Turkmenistan, in conjunction with the United Nations Development Programme, organised special seminars attended by over 100 participants from law enforcement agencies. Such events, relating to refresher training, took place all over the world, including in the United States, Europe and Asia. In March this year, Turkmenistan held a briefing relating to the presentation of a national plan on combatting trafficking.
Turkmenistan had ratified a significant number of legal instruments and it received bilateral requests on extradition related to criminal prosecutions, including for crimes of torture. When a person was extradited, Turkmenistan took into account all guarantees provided in relevant United Nations Conventions. In each case, the situation of the person was reviewed to ensure the person would not be subject to torture in the country to which the person was extradited. It was necessary to receive a written confirmation from the State that torture would not be used against those individuals.
Closing Remarks
CLAUDE HELLER, Committee Chairperson, said the delegation had 48 hours to provide the Committee with additional information. The Committee would highlight several priority recommendations within the concluding observations. The Committee hoped to continue an open, ongoing dialogue with the State party.
VEPA HAJIYEV, Permanent Representative of Turkmenistan to the United Nations Office at Geneva and head of the delegation, expressed gratitude to the Committee for having the opportunity to present the report. Thanks to the open dialogue over the last two days, members of the delegation had identified priority areas to focus on. The Committee’s recommendations would be thoroughly reviewed. There was a need to review the State’s legislation to ensure it was fully aligned with the main provisions of the Convention. Any progress required work and readiness to move forward.
___________
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
CAT25.007E
MIL OSI United Nations News –