Human Rights Committee

Ninety-second Session

2521^st Meeting (AM)

HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE CONCLUDES TWO-DAY DISCUSSION OF PANAMA’S COMPLIANCE

WITH INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON CIVIL, POLITICAL RIGHTS

 

Experts Raise Questions on Child Labour,

Indigenous Rights, Minority Religious Protections, Abortion Laws

Panama was striving to modernize its human rights legislation and its willingness to consider carrying out certain improvements -- including the possibility of elaborating a new Penal Code -- would ease its backlog of criminal cases and spur wider judicial reform, the Chairman of the Human Rights Committee said this morning.

Concluding a two-day dialogue with Panama on compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Committee Chairman Rafael Rivas Posada, expert from Colombia, encouraged Panama to continue on its course and expressed hope that there would not be such a lengthy silence from the country before the Committee in the future.  He cautioned, however, that it was not enough to say that the provisions of the Covenant were “respected” in Panama’s legislation and jurisprudence; movement towards protecting and incorporating the Covenant as much as possible in the country’s legal fabric should be made.

Underlining the concerns expressed by the 18-member monitoring body, Mr. Posada added that Panama must seek ways to continue addressing the problem of child labour, as the protection of minors was a fundamental concern in the human rights arena.  Other Committee experts questioned the delegation on a range of other concerns, including the impact of development projects, the tourism industry and mining activities on indigenous populations, the rights of minority religions, and the possibility of conscientious objection by doctors to performing otherwise permitted abortions.

Responding to those questions, Sara Rodriquez, Coordinator of Public Policy in Panama’s Ministry of Social Development, assured the Committee that the State network was working to keep children from falling back into child labour.  In urban areas, the approach was “comprehensive”, and included street teams, as well as community centres that, among other services, supplied educational scholarships.

In border areas, the Government had made progress establishing multigrade schools.  Children who were identified through the child safety programmes and who fell outside typical educational programmes were being incorporated into Panama’s literacy campaign.

Juan Alberto Castellero, who, as Panama’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations in Geneva, headed up the delegation, told the Committee that the fundamental freedoms of his country’s tribal peoples were respected.  The Government had set up five indigenous regions, occupying one third of the country.  A framework law was being considered that would allow protection of indigenous lands.

Another delegation member said that the Ministry of Education was also working to promote bilingual education.  Laws aimed at promoting Panama’s multicultural and multi-ethnic society, including legislation targeting indigenous women, were also in place.  Further, while Catholicism was practiced by the majority of the country, the “overriding goal” was to ensure order and respect for all religions.  Classes on the catechism were not required in schools, although “generic” courses on religion and morality were taught.

Responding to another of the Committee’s concerns, a delegation member explained that a doctor appointed to carry out an abortion did have the right to conscientiously object to the procedure.  That did not mean, however, that the abortion could not be carried out by other qualified health professionals within the time frame for legal abortions.

The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. Wednesday, 26 March, to take up consideration of the second periodic report of The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

Background

The Human Rights Committee met this morning to conclude its consideration of Panama’s third periodic report on compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.  For background, see Press Release HR/CT/697.

Panama ’s Responses to Written Questions

Panama’s delegation, which was headed by Permanent Representative of Panama to the United Nations in Geneva, Juan Alberto Castellero, also included:  Victor Caballero, Adviser to the Minister of Government and Justice; Alejandro Mendoza, Counsellor to the Permanent Mission to the United Nations and other International Organizations in Geneva; Jorge Corrales, Counsellor to the Permanent Mission to the United Nations and other International Organizations in New York; Francisco Troya, Police Adviser to the Permanent Mission to the United Nations and other International Organizations in New York; Sara Rodriquez, Coordinator of Public Policy in the Ministry of Social Development; Luis Gomez, Office of the Attorney General; Janio Tunon, Director of the Department of Human Rights and Social Development; Edgardo Sandoval, Head of the Department of Human Rights in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; and Jose Ivan Guerrero, Director of the Academy of Penitentiary Training in the Ministry of Government and Justice. 

Before the delegation responded to the experts’ written questions, Mr. CASTELLERO answered a few of the Committee’s concerns that had been raised during yesterday’s meeting.  On Panama’s refugee programme –- which aimed to regularize persons that had been living in the country for 10 years or more –- he said that plan had been the result of a request by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to help deal with Central American refugees who had fled their homes during civil strife in the 1970s and 1980s and were now living in Panama.

Those refugees now had family ties and jobs in Panama, wished to stay there and needed to have status that would allow them to.  The policy had been reached by consensus with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and other organizations dealing with refugees, he added.  Turning to employment, he said that the delegation had no information on workplace discrimination against pregnant women.  The country’s Labour Code allowed for maternity leave and various types of fixed-term contracts.

On the work of the Truth Commission, he said that the panel had documented 110 cases, 67 of which there had involved prior judicial action.  The Commission had also investigated two forced disappearance cases.  In addition, 17 cases before the Commission had been called for reopening and one was pending a decision.  There were no obstacles hampering the Commission’s work.  It had been created by the executive and had been provided with the necessary resources to carry out its work.

Turning to the rights of indigenous people, he assured the Committee that the fundamental freedoms of Panama’s tribal people were respected.  He said that the Government had set up five indigenous regions, occupying one third of the country.  A framework law was being considered that would allow protection of indigenous lands.

Turning to the question of whether torture was allowed by law, a member of the delegation said torture was illegal and information obtained by torture was not permitted as evidence.  On questions related to Panama’s penitentiary system, he said reform of penal justice required a revised Penal Code.  But, he stressed that currently the basic postulate was minimum detention.  Recent legislation constituted a model of accusatory procedures, where the judge was the only way to dictate preventive arrest.  Meanwhile, a catalogue of cautionary measures designed to apply to instances of preventive detention was being developed and disseminated.  Alternative ways out of conflict, such as mediation and conciliation, would also contribute to lessening the court system’s burden.

Addressing questions concerning the police and whether civil custodians committed torture and what sanctions existed to punish those tactics, he said the police must protect the persons under their custody.  The police were prohibited from instigating or committing acts of torture, or any other arbitrary discriminatory action.  Any acts outside those rules were outside the Penitentiary Code.  Should a violation be suspected, the professional responsibility section conducted investigations to determine the culpability of those accused of committing such violations.  Those investigations were typically prompted by accusations and, once the investigations were concluded, their findings were forwarded to the overseeing body.  If the violations were severe, the person found guilty might be dismissed, he said. 

Turning to questions of arrest and pre-trial detention, he said that pre-trial detention was limited to 24 hours, or it might be considered illegal.  Concerning questions of abuse of those in detention, he further said the Ministry had circulated a call for compliance on those regulations.  It was also seeking a new interpretation of judicial guidelines, which would stipulate that a judge had to issue the necessary documentation.  Overall, he said preventive arrest must occur only in exceptional cases.

Taking up the question of why habeas corpus did not function properly and noting that habeas corpus ensured freedom for the individual, he said that Panama was aware that its justice system did not correspond to all of the principles of habeas corpus and was making an effort to change its procedures.  On the question of whether there was a disparity between public and private legal representation, he said there was a system to provide adequate representation for those who could not afford a private lawyer.  While there might be an overload in workloads, the law said more defenders could be provided, if necessary.  Defenders from other countries could also be used, although currently the auxiliary defense must make those decisions in consultation with those seeking the foreign representation.

On questions of legal delays, he said that his Government was aware of the severity of the problem and had recently held meetings to address the issue.  Training sessions had been held and two more centres for mediation had been established, bringing to five the total centres in the country.  Technological advances had also led to more audio-visual communication, which allowed speedier resolution of some cases.  The Supreme Court and the Ministry would be establishing greater coordination and would target their coordinated efforts on Panama’s 2^nd Circuit, where the largest backlog exists.

On the administration of justice, he said that the delegation would provide an overview of the Government’s actions to the Committee.  He also said the delegation did not have more information on naturalization, but would provide it at a later date.

Experts’ Questions and Comments

Committee Chair RAFAEL RIVAS POSADA, expert from Colombia, said that the panel had been pleased to hear the seriousness with which the delegation had taken its questions.  He was also pleased with the Government’s willingness to consider carrying out certain improvements and reforms, particularly with regard to the administration of justice and, possibly, the elaboration of a new Penal Code.  Improvements to that Code would certainly ease some of the backlog of criminal cases and help spur further judicial reforms.

Sir NIGEL RODLEY, expert from the United Kingdom, asked for clarification on whether the new Code eliminated the possibility of conscientious objection by doctors to performing otherwise permitted abortions.  Also, while he appreciated the Government’s acknowledgement that abuses could occur, even with frequency, in prisons, what was being done to address that serious issue?  Had the Government considered adopting that Second Optional Protocol to the International Convention against Torture, which would help it monitor the treatment of detainees and prisoners?

Panama ’s Replies to Written Questions

Ambassador CASTELLERO said that the delegation would study the legislation on abortion and provide more information on the matter shortly.  He added that the delegation appreciated the Committee’s concerns about the social situation in his country.  Those questions that could not be answered full now would be answered later, perhaps by Friday.

Another member of the delegation said that meetings had been held in the Foreign Affairs Ministry to consider the Anti-Torture Convention’s Second Optional Protocol.  The benefits of that instrument had been discussed and the issue had been sent on to relevant ministries, including the Justice Ministry, for further consideration.  He believed that progress on that matter at all levels would soon lead to the adoption of the Protocol.

Turning to the Committee’s written questions, he provided information on the numerous religions being practiced freely in the country.  The Constitution noted that Catholicism was the religion practiced by the majority of the country.  The overriding goal, however, was to ensure order and respect for all religions.  There was harmony between all religions.  Classes on the catechism were not required in schools, he said.  “Generic” courses on religion and morality were taught, however.

Another member of the delegation intervened briefly to respond to Sir Nigel’s question on abortion.  She said that perhaps a transcription error had led to his misunderstanding of the relevant legislation.  To clarify:  In Panama, a doctor appointed to carry out an abortion did have the right to conscientiously object to the procedure.  At the same time, that did not mean that the abortion would not be carried out by other qualified health professionals.

Returning to the expert’s questionnaire, a delegate said that demonstration was allowed in the country, but police were allowed to close roads and keep order.  There could be a legitimate use of force, if such force were appropriate.  Another delegate said that the Constitution acknowledged the right to peaceful assembly, but that right was occasionally modified in cases where such assembly infringes on the rights of third parties.  The State could close streets and major thruways, as well as roads used for access to schools or hospitals.  When the State was forced to act, it did so according to international norms.

Turning to question 18, which asked about the impact of accusations of slander on working journalists, a delegation member defined slander as “false accusations” and said Panama’s legislation created a higher sphere for professionals than for individuals.  He said that, in recent years, 69 cases had been brought against persons who had committed defamation using the mass media.  One of those accused had been declared innocent, while there had been 17 dismissals and no permanent sentences.

On questions of child support, a member of the delegation said the procedure provided for in the Family Code said that the judge could establish the measures necessary to create immediate compliance.  There were also options to order a father’s salary to be docked and the money conveyed to the child involved.  Any employer who refused to comply would be held responsible.  Violations by the father could lead to a contempt of court accusation. 

Taking up the question of child labour, she also said that Panamanian legislation included child labour among its list of types of “dangerous work”.  A national network of experts on child labour had been created to investigate matters of child labour.  Research showed 10 per cent of adolescents were engaged in domestic work and, of these, nearly 20 per cent were indigenous boys and girls.  Overall, nearly 48,000 people between the age of 5 and 17 were doing work, with a majority of those child workers being boys.  The prevalence was higher in rural areas.  Boys and girls worked an average of 26 hours a week, a total which, she noted, did not go beyond the legislative limits. 

The State had a number of strategies to eradicate child labour, she said.  The State network was working to keep children from falling back into child labour.  In urban areas the approach was “comprehensive” and included educational efforts.  This approach included street teams, as well as community centres.  Scholarships were given through these community centres and their affiliated programmes.  Programmes also existed to generate cooperation with the private sector, which often provided scholarships to child workers.  Recently, the number of scholarships from the private sector had increased, she said.  In border areas, the Government had made progress establishing multigrade schools.  Those children who were identified through the child safety programmes and who fell outside educational programmes were being incorporated into Panama’s literacy campaign.

Turning to questions of sexual trafficking and the use of certain types of visas in sexual trafficking circles, a delegation member said the law did not consider the use of visas for sexual exploitation of immigrants legal.  Anyone who employed someone else had the right to detain the documents of their workers.  This ability functioned as one type of control measure, he said.  Other control measures included the requirement that persons with visas allowing them to work in the country had to report periodically to the immigration office.  In the cases of victims of sexual trafficking, he said the law empowered the national immigration service to establish prevention measures.  Educational campaigns had been authorized to keep people from falling into the practice of sexual trafficking.  Comprehensive attention was being paid to victims of that crime, he added.

On violations of the rights of indigenous people, another member of the delegation highlighted various laws in place to protect and promote those rights and ensure the continuation of their cultures.  The Ministry of Education was also working to promote bilingual education, and a relevant law to that end would go into effect later this year.  There were also laws aimed at promoting Panama’s multicultural and multi-ethnic society, including legislation targeting indigenous women.

She also said that the Government was working to ensure legal protections for the peoples and lands of the Comarca areas designated for indigenous populations.  A framework law that was being crafted with the help of grass-roots organizations was under consideration in that regard.  The Government was studying the adoption of such a law, which would focus on either the Comarca areas or other regions identified by indigenous groups themselves.  The benefits of both were being weighed.

On dissemination of information on the Covenant, a member of the delegation said the Government, with the assistance of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, had held a workshop on drafting reports to treaty bodies and other human rights agencies.  While the Government considered the assistance of civil society in those efforts vital, such grass-roots actors had not directly participated in the elaboration of Panama’s third compliance report.  At the same time, civil society views had been channelled through the Office of the Human Rights Ombudsman, who had participated in the drafting.

He stressed that professionals were working on the report and paying equal attention to concrete efforts to implement the Covenant and other human rights norms on the ground.   Panama was not a country that denied the existence of challenges and was working hard to address serious concerns.  There had been time limits for the preparation of this report, but the State would keep its doors open to hear the concerns of civil society.

Experts’ Comments and Questions

JOSÉ LUIS SANCHEZ-CERRO, expert from Peru, said that, while the Family Code noted that children had the right to protection from exploitation or trafficking, the delegation had not mentioned any specific legislation in Panama’s Criminal Code to punish sexual exploitation of children and minors, as well as forced labour and other conditions of servitude.

AHMED TAWFIK KHALIL, expert from Egypt, said that, while the delegation had noted constitutional provisions on the right of all Panamanians to peaceful assembly, the actual situation in the country regarding such assembly “might not be so rosy”.  He asked the delegation to clarify the Government’s position on assembly and what State measures were used to regulate public gatherings.  He also expressed concerns about reports on the number of journalists being held on charges of defamation.

On child support in Panama, he said that the question was not whether there were legal provisions that compelled fathers to take care of their children, but whether such duties were, in fact, carried out and whether measures were in place to address the needs of such children during lengthy court proceedings.  What happened when a father had no income?

Turning to child labour issues, he asked about changes in the country’s laws that seemed to allow labour of children under 14 years of age in certain cases.  He added that reports seemed to show that child domestic labour in Panama was still a great problem.  He was pleased, however, that the Government realized that problem existed in that area and had several plans and programmes under way to address it, including with follow up at the level of relevant social ministries.  He also had some concerns about labour conditions for women.

Referring to questions about the relationship between sexual trafficking and Panamanian visas being issued to artists, EDWIN JOHNSON LOPEZ, expert from Ecuador, asked if investigations had been carried out.  If so, what results had been achieved and what punishments had been given for those who participated in sexual trafficking?  He also inquired if Panama’s authorities had identified where the so-called artists came from and where they got the visas. 

IULIA ANTOANELLA MOTOC, expert from Romania, said that important questions about indigenous peoples had been unanswered.  Noting that many indigenous peoples were disabled, she asked how the steps Panama had taken to address their disabled population impacted its indigenous people specifically.  While Panama had regional programmes for indigenous peoples, she wondered if there was national coordination on this topic.  If not, why?  What would its impact mean? 

Saying that indigenous peoples should be incorporated in planning legislation and development projects, Ms. MOTOC also asked for more detail on Panama’s position on the issue.  Had indigenous people been consulted on development projects and, if so, which ones?  Noting that reports from non-governmental organizations claimed indigenous people had been evicted from their lands, she also inquired if those reports were true and how the Government approached this matter. 

RAJSOOMER LALLAH, expert from Mauritius, expanded on the questions asked by Ms. MOTOC.  He expressed suspicions that Panama was not doing enough vis a vis its indigenous peoples, pointing to the report’s statement that the Government did not have enough resources.  Noting that indigenous people were amongst the most underprivileged sectors of any country’s population, he pointed out that a number of different groups in Panama had been affected not only by development projects, but by tourism and mining activities.  He said he hoped the delegation would take those concerns into account.  Even if resources were limited, greater efforts should be made by the Government to prioritize the needs of indigenous peoples and the threats they faced. 

ELISABETH PALM, expert from Sweden, expressed concern that, according to Panama’s report, women were severely underrepresented on the national Government level.  She asked what real actions had been taken to allow women to reach the 30 per cent participation level set by Panama’s own legislation.  She also highlighted the fact that wages were higher for men than women in the labour market and a majority of men were employed.  Noting that the practice of giving women pregnancy tests during job application processes was no longer legal, she wondered if that was, nonetheless, still regularly done. 

Asking if domestic violence was distinguished as a specific crime -- and noting it was a good thing if it was, Ms. PALM also requested more information on how the legislation was implemented.  Were women allowed to file accusations against their aggressive husbands or ex-husbands, and what protection was given them once they had made those accusations?  She requested more statistical data on how many domestic violence prosecutions had been carried out and what the outcomes were.  Finally, she asked about the refuge and protection provided by Panama’s domestic violence shelters. 

ABDELFATTAH AMOR, expert from Tunisia, said he had found the report to be frank, sincere and relevant to the Committee’s work.  At the same time, he would like more information on child labour and on freedom of expression.  Specifically, he inquired what effective measures the Government had adopted to fight against child labour and to limit its prevalence.  He also asked how much time was set aside for children’s education, what was the rate of school attendance for children, including the indigenous rate, and at what age school was compulsory.  Noting that the work of many of those child labourers was domestic, he said their status as domestic workers raised questions about how much the employment of children was reminiscent of slavery.  In some cases in Panama, he said, there was surveillance and inspection, but no concrete measures to prevent child labour. 

Turning to freedom of expression in terms of religion, Mr. AMOR acknowledged that Panama was a Catholic nation.  But, he wanted more information on how the rights of minority religions were respected.  Saying that there were general difficulties in defining the limits of Christian morality, he stressed that references to morality could not be taken from a single religion.  While that was not a problem in terms of human rights and religious conviction, he said he was raising the issue in relation to other States, as well.  The problem was not necessarily blatant discrimination, but a sense of reservation on the part of those in the minority sects. 

MAURICE AHANHANZO GLÈLÈ-AHANHANZO, expert from Benin, said that he had studied the situation of indigenous people around the world and believed that issues regarding native peoples and land rights needed to be addressed from a rights-based perspective.  He asked the delegation to clarify its position on what efforts were being undertaken to protect vulnerable indigenous populations.

Panama ’s Response

A member of the delegation said that Panama’s Penal Code set out protections and punishments for the “corruption” of minors.  At the same time, a new Penal Code was being elaborated that included punishments for child sexual exploitation and servitude, as well as corruption of minors.  The expansive new laws would punish such exploitation of minor children throughout the country not only by targeting perpetrators, but also persons who were aware of such ill-treatment but failed to report it to proper authorities.

He went on to reiterate that all Panamanians had the right to assembly, but such gatherings should not infringe on the rights and freedoms of others.  Neither should they impede the free movement of others.  He also said that Panama acknowledged the right to freedom of information and did not proscribe language that was critical of public figures carrying out their duties.

On domestic violence, he highlighted relevant legislation that provided the means to protect victims, including through arrest and removal of presumed aggressors from homes or residences, or the removal of victims to safe houses.  Such laws extended protection to children, and also took into consideration the need to integrate victims back into their homes and wider society following such violence or abuse.  He said that there had been an increase in the number of domestic violence cases, as victims were now reporting incidents more freely.

A member of the delegation said that a national programme on the protection of minors had in fact been ratified.  The sale of children had also been included as an offence in Panama’s Criminal Code and carried a 5- to 10-year sentence.  It also applied to those who encouraged the sale of any child.  Further, the transfer of children for the purpose of sexual exploitation or servitude would be one third more. 

Forced labour was also included in the Criminal Code, she said.  Panama had adopted the International Labour Organization law on forced labour, which prohibits employing anyone younger than 18 in a way that impacted their health or morality.  The law also included domestic labour.  While disparate laws were being reconciled to address the work of minors less than 14 years, she stressed that, overall, using minorities for domestic labour was prohibited.

Acknowledging that more than one million children lived in extreme poverty in Panama, she said the Government must make changes in how it protected minors.  Currently there were programmes to ensure integral social protection for minors.  Fifty thousand families in extreme poverty were being helped in rural areas and Panama was engaging with indigenous households to address the social welfare of their children, including through implementing vaccination and nutrition programmes.  In addition, Panama’s Network of Opportunity programme was available at the national level and it not only addressed the needs of people in extreme poverty, but increased assistance through its educational centres.  Efforts were being made to extend those services to minors and to indigenous peoples.  As part of efforts to ensure the right to food for minors, legal steps were also sometimes used to generate compliance, she added. 

Due to time limitations, she said all outstanding answers would be provided in writing.

Closing Remarks

In closing, the Committee Chairman, RAFAEL RIVAS POSADA, expert from Colombia, thanked the Panamanian delegation for its report and its responses to the experts’ comments and questions.  He said Panama was endeavouring to modernize its human rights legislation.  Still, the Committee needed pertinent information to get a clear picture of Panama’s social reality and impact the legal provisions had on society as a whole.  For those points on which the Committee had requested statistics, he said that type of data was often the only way to evaluate some aspects of daily life.  It was not enough to say that the Covenant’s provisions were respected in Panama’s legislation and jurisprudence.  Rather, movement must be made to protect and incorporate the Covenant in the legal fabric of the country and he asked Panama to incorporate it as much as possible. 

He underlined that concerns about indigenous peoples and minorities and how was Panama making an effort to respect their rights would continue to be relevant.  He encouraged the Government to continue addressing the problem of child labour, as the protection of minors was a fundamental concern in the human rights arena.

Emphasizing the progress that Panama had already made, he noted there was a considerable backlog in judicial cases throughout Latin America.  In those instances where Governments were trying to make the judiciary more responsive, he stressed that it should not be seen as a panacea, even if it could help reduce the backlog.  He also raised the fact that the dangers inherent in the criminalization of homosexuality still existed.  Such criminalization would run counter to the Committee’s work, he said.

Finally, he encouraged the delegation’s members to continue on the course of action they had taken and expressed hope that there would not be such a lengthy silence from Panama before the Committee in the future.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record