Human Rights Committee

101^st Session

2784^th Meeting* (PM)

Mongolian Delegation Tells of Death Penalty Moratorium, Landmark Gender Equality

Legislation as Human Rights Council Takes Up Its Fifth Periodic Report

 

Police Conduct, Independence of National Human Rights Commission Questioned

Mongolia had announced a moratorium on the death penalty in the last 10 years, in addition to having enacted a landmark gender equality law and streamlined procedures for registering non-governmental organizations with the State in order to improve their overall efficiency, the Human Rights Council heard today as it took up that country’s fifth periodic report.

Gungaa Bayasgalan, State Secretary in Mongolia’s Ministry of Justice and Home Affairs, said that while seven types of grave crime still merited the death penalty, the Constitution ensured that those sentenced could apply for a presidential pardon, he said, adding that the Government was planned to accede to the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights with the aim of abolishing the death penalty.

He said that his country’ gender equality law, enacted on 2 February 2011, defined the legal foundations for equality in economic, social, cultural and family relations, and established a gender-equality quota that ensured equal financial support for male and female election candidates.

The 18-member Committee is charged with monitoring compliance with the Covenant on the part of its States parties.  Throughout today’s meeting, its experts pressed the Mongolian delegation to define where the Covenant ranked in their country’s legal order, and to address claims that its now 10-year-old National Human Rights Commission lacked impartiality and independence.  That was, especially true, they said, in its assessment of events that unfolded on 1 July 2008, when the Government had declared a state of emergency after post-election protests had erupted into rioting that had lasted four days.  About 700 to 800 people had been arrested, some experts said, and around 300 charged.  Many detainees had allegedly been beaten and forced to sign self-implicating statements.  Questions also centred on the ability of the General Investigation Unit of the National Prosecutor’s Office to stand up to the police force in any investigation.

Mr. Bayasgalan responded by saying the Government had the same information as the Committee in that regard, but emphasized the importance of bearing in mind that 300 people had been sentenced for their involvement in murder, robbery, assault and fire-starting on public premises — not their participation in demonstrations.  He said the Government had subsequently enacted a law ensuring entitlements for victims who had incurred physical and material losses due to the 1 July events.  In cases of death, family members could receive more than $40,000, depending on the injury, and in some instances, up to 36 times the monthly salary of the deceased person, he added.

Regarding the National Human Rights Commission, he said the 20-member body was mandated to identify human rights issues, make recommendations on compliance with legislation, comment on the implementation of international human rights treaties, and produce reports on human rights implementation in the country.  It also had the right to participate in trials, he said, stressing that as far as the 1 July 2008 events were concerned, it had exercised its duties and visited detention centres to determine whether rights violations had taken place at the hands of police.  He conceded, however, there was a need to increase its membership.

As for the Investigation Unit of the Prosecutor’s Office, he described it as a fairly new institutional structure.  “Please be patient and don’t worry about these cases,” he said, adding that any abuse by the police would require the Prosecutor’s Office to step in.

The Human Rights Committee will reconvene at 10 a.m. tomorrow, 22 March, to continue its consideration of Mongolia’s fifth periodic report.

Background

The Human Rights Committee continued its 101^st session today, taking up the fifth periodic report of Mongolia.

Mongolia’s parliament, the State Great Khural, has adopted the Law on the National Human Rights Commission, an independent body tasked with the protection of human rights, the report says, adding that citizens who feel their constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms have been violated by economic entities, public officials or individuals can seek redress from it.

Mongolia adopted a national programme in 2003, and other efforts to bolster human rights include developing national law-enforcement bodies, which stand as the legal guarantee that rights and freedoms will be protected, the report says.  Recently adopted laws include the Criminal Code, Criminal Procedure Code, Civil Code, Civil Procedure Code, Court Law and the Law on Prosecution Authority.

According to the report, the Administrative Procedural Law and the subsequently established Administrative Case Court, as official mechanisms for restoring violated rights and promoting a fair legal order, set out further protections of human rights and freedoms against illegal and arbitrary acts on the part of administrative organs and officials.  The parliament also adopted the Anti-Corruption Law and the Law on the Legal Status of the Financial Regulatory Commission, providing an impetus to combat corruption and regulate the financial markets, thereby adding to human rights protections and strengthening justice.

Introduction of Report

GUNGAA BAYASGALAN, State Secretary, Ministry of Justice and Home Affairs of Mongolia, presented his country’s fifth periodic report, updating the Committee on the progress it had made since the submission of its last periodic report.  The death sentence had been officially suspended but unofficially, it had been abolished since 2009.  However, the death sentence remained part of the national laws, with relevant clauses of the Criminal Code outlining seven types of grave crime that merited that punishment.  The Constitution ensured that those sentenced to death could seek pardon from the President, he said, adding that Mongolia would accede to the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights with the aim of abolishing the death penalty.

Turning to other areas, he said the Government had enacted a gender equality law on 2 February 2011, with the aim of defining the legal foundation for ensuring gender equality in economic, social, cultural and family relations.  It would apply equally to economic entities and individuals.  Apart from prohibiting gender discrimination, it established a gender-equality quota and provided for equal financial support for male and female election candidates.  However, it did not regulate matters pertaining to equal gender representation, he noted.

He went on to say that the number of licences that the Government had issued to non-governmental organizations had been reduced to eliminate bureaucracy.  Some 337 licences had also been revised, leading to the elimination of 101 licences.  Another 10 types of licences had been delegated to professional non-governmental organizations.

Committee Experts’ Comments and Questions

YUJI IWASAWA, expert from Japan, noted that Mongolia was a party to most of the core human rights treaties, including the Covenant, which it had ratified in 1974.  He asked the delegation to explain the rules for the timely reporting of treaty bodies.  Noting that Mongolia had ratified the Optional Protocol in July 2010, becoming the second country to do so, he said the Protocol had an individual communications procedure, as did the First Optional Protocol, to which Mongolia was not yet a party.

Thanking the delegation for its useful written replies, he expressed regret that its responses were “rather short” and limited to an explanation of laws.  They stopped short of discussing the Covenant’s implementation, he said, noting, however, that article 40 requested State Parties to outline the difficulties of implementing the Covenant.  He commended the Government for outlining national programmes to combat domestic violence, prevent the trafficking of women and children for purposes of sexual exploitation, and support persons with disabilities.

Noting that article 10, paragraph 3 of Mongolia’s Constitution provided that international treaties would become effective as domestic legislation, he said it was not clear where the Covenant ranked in the country’s legal order.  Could it be directly invoked in court, especially the Constitutional Court?, he asked.  As for the National Human Rights Commission, he cited allegations that it was not impartial, asking how its commissioners were appointed and by whom.  He also requested information on its budget.

Turning to the state of emergency declared in July 2008, he said he had information that violence following the 29 June 2008 parliamentary elections had evolved into a riot, prompting the declaration of a state of emergency that had lasted four days.  About 700 to 800 people had been arrested, 450 investigated and around 300 charged.  Some 270 people had been sentenced to prison terms lasting from six months to five years, he recalled, adding that many detainees had allegedly been beaten and forced to sign self-implicating statements.  There had also been reports of abuse, with four people allegedly having been shot with live ammunition.  One person had died from inhaling smoke caused by a fire that had destroyed the ruling party’s headquarters, he said.

Could those facts be confirmed?, he asked.  If so, had the perpetrators been brought to justice, and had the victims’ families received compensation?  He also requested the texts of Mongolia’s amnesty laws of 2009 and 2010.  As for the four people shot dead, he said the delegation’s written replies stated that the General Prosecutor’s Office had investigated six police officers, four of them in leadership positions.  Charges had been dropped due to “insufficient crime elements”, he said, asking which elements had been deemed insufficient and for what reason.  The four officers in leadership positions had been released in line with amnesty legislation, he noted, asking what the law required.

As for the person who had died after the fire, he said the delegation’s reply stated that the case had been dropped under the 2009 amnesty law.  How many police officers had been interrogated in connection with that case, and under what context had the law been invoked?, he asked, pointing out that the application of amnesty laws in connection with the 1 July incidents appeared out of line with the Covenant.  He requested details concerning how the application of those laws to police officers was compatible with effective remedies under the Covenant.  What role had the National Commission played in those events?

On issue 5 (women’s social participation), he noted the Government’s efforts to eliminate gender inequality, but wondered whether the gender equality law had been enacted.  Since the national programme on gender equality had been revised to include a rights-based approach, why had the 2007 revision not yet been approved?  Recalling also that the law on parliamentary elections had been amended in 2005, he asked why the provision relating to the male-to-female ratio had been repealed.  The proportion of female candidates had stood at 8 per cent in 1992, 14 per cent in 2004 and even higher in 2008, he said.  If the number of female candidates had increased, why had the number of women elected dropped from 11.8 per cent in 2000 to 3.9 per cent in 2008?

Despite their active participation in the labour market and civil society, women were also underrepresented in political decision-making, he said, asking how the Government planned to address that issue.  Turning to issue 6, he said ultra-nationalists had perpetrated physical and sexual attacks against people, who were also subjected to arbitrary arrest and various types of threats.  Noting with satisfaction that the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender centre had been officially recognized in 2009, he urged Mongolia to continue its awareness-raising campaigns among law-enforcement officials “with vigour” to prevent discrimination.  He also requested statistics on the number of HIV-positive people in the country.

HELLEN KELLER, expert from Switzerland, said that, while the enactment of the gender equality law was commendable, it did not answer the question as to whether the Government planned to adopt comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation covering all rights recognized in the Covenant.  What statistical data had the Government collected on national implementation of Covenant rights?

She asked the delegation to describe the financial and human resources allocated to the national programme on gender equality, and about decisions taken in that regard.  What was the Government doing to ensure women’s equal rights in the areas of employment and maternity protection, and to tackle domestic and sexual violence?  Did it plan to criminalize marital rape, and how did it plan to ensure that public officials were aware of the legal provisions relating to violence against women?

Turning to issue 7 (states of emergency), she said the delegation’s written reply stated that, although various articles of the Covenant were reflected in article 92 of the Constitution, they had not been implemented.  How were those rights protected by law and in practice, if they were not expressly protected in the Constitution’s state of emergency clause?

KRISTER THELIN, expert from Sweden, cited instances in which the delegation’s written answers to the experts’ list of questions had been “on the short side”.  Voicing support for Mongolia’s moratorium on the death penalty, he said it was encouraging that parliament was taking steps to accede to the Covenant’s Second Optional Protocol and formally abolish the death penalty.  When would parliamentary action occur?  Conceding that public opinion might favour retaining that “gruesome punishment”, particularly in the wake of grisly crimes, he asked what, if anything, the Government was doing to raise public awareness and support for its abolition.

The Committee had noted that a new review was planned for the 10 police officers charged in relation to the July 2008 demonstrations, he said, wondering whether it would merely be a pro forma review or might result in an indictment.  Reports from non-governmental organizations suggested that the case had been handled in direct contrast to that of the 270 protesters, who had all been convicted and sentenced to a range of prison sentences.  The non-governmental organizations had reported multiple violations in those trials, including closed court sessions, he said, pointing out that the State had justified that lack of transparency on the basis that minors had been involved.  He requested details about the involvement of minors and sought clarification concerning reports that the standards for the protesters’ establishing guilt were not as high as those used to investigate the police officers.

He went on to cite reports that defendants whose lawyers had invoked international covenants, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, had given longer sentences, and pressed the delegation for clarification regarding that “double punishment”.  He also asked how many trials had been held for the 270 defendants, saying he had heard that there had been 28 trials for 143 defendants.  What had happened to the other case, he asked, while also requesting information on the ratio between indictments, on one hand, and convictions, on the other.

Turning to question 10 (work of the Investigation Unit of the National Prosecutor’s Office), he said there seemed to have been a high percentage of dismissals among cases handled by that Unit.  According to the delegation, 35 cases had been decided on their merits, but only 10 seemed to have been disposed of, he said.  What had happened to the 25 unresolved cases, he asked.  Of those that had been disposed of, had there been any convictions, and, if so, what had the sentences been?  Had the victims been compensated?  The figures put forward by non-governmental organizations were quite different — indeed, much higher — than those provided by the Government, he said, asking what the reason for those differences might be.

He went on to state that the Investigation Unit was reportedly much weaker than the police force, suggesting that it lacked the ability to stand up to the police force in any investigation.  Moreover, it seemed that, according to the Criminal Code, certain officials, including police officers, fell outside the circle of possible prosecution.  He requested the delegation to provide further details on the Investigation Unit’s work and on immunity granted to any member of the police force.

Drawing attention to the Convention against Torture, he pointed to paragraph 9 in the concluding observations of the Committee against Tortureand Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, which noted that article 44 (1) of Mongolia’s Criminal Code exempted from investigation anyone who had “only acted on orders”, saying:  “That to me seems to be very strange.”  Concurring with the recommendation by the Committee against Torture that the State immediately repeal that particular provision, he asked whether any progress had been made in fulfilling it and whether there was any independent body to investigate allegations of mistreatment and torture by police officers in Mongolia.

Taking up issue 10 (training on international human rights norms among judges and lawyers), he suggested that Mongolia had no systematic approach to such training and that, in fact, it seemed to be conducted by those who might allegedly engage in acts of torture and ill treatment.  He requested the delegation to clarify that point, asking also about the use of video and audio monitoring of detention cells.  He requested statistics on the percentage of cells monitored, and information on how monitoring information was stored for possible use during future investigations, including by possible victims of ill treatment.

FABIÁN OMAR SALVIOLI, expert from Argentina, noted that the head of the National Human Rights Commission had said there was no evidence of torture and ill treatment, and that July 2008 protesters had freely confessed, expressing surprise that Committee against Torture had found otherwise.  One non-governmental organization maintained that 88 out very 100 detainees had suffered some form of ill treatment, he said, joining other Committee members in expressing concern about the independence of the National Human Rights Commission.  Other reports from non-governmental organizations included detailed accounts of serious ill treatment of minors and women, as well as an absence of legal aid during interrogations.  Had the State undertaken an investigation, as it was obliged to do under both the Covenant and the Anti-Torture Convention?, he asked.  If so, had its procedures been in compliance with the Istanbul Protocol?

On issue 13, touching on reports that from 2007 to 2009 some two thirds of all suspects had been detained without court authorization, he said the State’s assertion that no one had been detained without judicial order during that period contradicted other public reports, including those used during the Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review.  Could the State clarify those differences?

He then turned to issue 16, which asked about steps to end special isolation regimes for long-term prisoners, seeking the delegation’s assurance that the existing regime was in accordance with United Nations norms on the treatment of detainees, and in line with the recommendation of the Committee against Torture from 2010 on that point.  If, in the State’s assessment, those standards were being implemented adequately, how was that assessment made?, he asked.

RAFAEL RIVAS POSADA, expert from Colombia, said that, with respect to issue 14 (monitoring of places of detention), the Committee was curious as to who had a right to monitor prisoners’ living conditions.  The State’s response indicated that no independent institution was granted that right, he said, asking whether the Government was considering the creation of an independent mechanism, as it was required to do.  Overcrowding at detention centres and jails was nearly universal, he said, asking what alternative measures, such as parole, the State was considering to alleviate that problem.

On issue 15, on excessively long periods of pretrial detention, he stressed the Committee’s insistence on the shortest possible pretrial detention periods, including detention before being charged and prior to a judicial decision.  Were detainees given a maximum number of days in detention, and were there any mechanisms for extending that maximum time frame?, he asked, noting that previous reports had indicated a maximum detention period of up to 30 months.  Was that still the case?

IULIA ANTOANELLA MOTOC, expert from Romania, returned to previous questions, suggesting that women were underrepresented at the higher political levels.  What was the State’s position on reinstalling the 30 per cent quota for women candidates?  She also asked whether any bills aimed at eliminating discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons were under consideration.  Was there a discrepancy between public opinion and the law, as in the case of the death penalty?, she asked, pointing to reports that such people had suffered discrimination.

Other reports suggested the possibility of non-governmental organizations established to work for, rather than against, discrimination, she said, requesting additional information on their existence.  She also cited reports about the difficulties faced by children with disabilities, who lacked access to medical help.  She echoed concerns about reported problems in proving allegations of torture, and asked what measures had been taken to support victims of trafficking.  While the Criminal Code prohibited trafficking in children, how was Mongolia putting international covenants into practice in that area?, she asked.

Delegation’s Responses

Mr. BAYASGALAN recalled that the Government had approved in 2009 a regulation to ensure timely reporting to international conventions and identifying the agencies responsible for doing so.  Mongolia had acceded to the First Optional Protocol in 1991 and it was in effect, he said, conceding, however, that understanding and perceptions of the Covenant must be improved, notably by training officials.  Mongolia needed a great deal of expertise in that regard, he said, asking the Committee to provide professional assistance.

As for the composition of the National Human Rights Commission, he said it consisted of three members, with one assigned by parliament.  If any member had too many other duties, that person would be dismissed.  The Commission was charged with identifying human rights issues, making recommendations as to whether legislation was being followed, providing comments on the implementation of international human rights treaties, and producing a report on national implementation.  It also had the right to participate in trials and request an end to human rights violations, he said, adding that any institution receiving such a request must comply by law.

Regarding the extent to which international treaties were applicable in Mongolia, he said the Constitution stipulated that such treaties would become domestic law.  Furthermore, the Supreme Court had produced a resolution in February 2008 on the application of international treaties during court processes.  The National Human Rights Commission could appeal to the Supreme Court in that regard.  It had a 20-member staff and parliament approved its annual budget, he said, adding that there had been no history of reducing its budget.

Turning to the events of 1 July 2008, he said the Committee’s information was similar to the Government’s, but it was important to bear in mind that 300 people had been sentenced because they had been involved in murder, robbery, assault and fire-starting on public premises, not for participating in demonstrations.  On 3 September 2009, the Government had enacted a law to ensure entitlements for victims who had incurred physical and material losses due to the 1 July events.  Other regulations outlined how to file a complaint, he said, noting that, in cases involving death, family members of the deceased could receive more than $40,000, depending on the injury, and in some instances up to 36 times the monthly salary of the deceased.

In other areas, he said the amnesty law was a general one covering various events, including those of 1 July 2008, and had been enacted after the President had assumed office.  The dismissal of the case against the police officers was being re-investigated by the Police Department General Investigation Unit and, once complete, the case would be transferred to the courts for consideration.  The National Human Rights Commission had exercised its mandated duties, visiting detention centres to investigate whether human rights violations had taken place at the hands of police officers.

Responding to comments about women’s social participation, he said the gender equality law was “rather comprehensive” legislation prohibiting any form of gender discrimination in various sectors, the enactment of which had required “a great deal” of political will.  The national gender equality programme would continue through 2013, he added.  Explaining the decline in the share of female parliamentarians, he said the legislature had decided to link the quota for female candidates to the electoral law, pointing out that Mongolia also used a “majoritarian” system.

Turning to rights violations against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, he said:  “We are making certain progress in this regard,” stressing that the Government had officially registered non-governmental organizations for them and undertaken awareness-raising campaigns.  The Government would conduct training for police and other law-enforcement officers, he said, emphasizing that it had registered no hate crimes against “LGBT” people, and that the Constitution prohibited discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.  Also, a comprehensive anti-discrimination law was “on the agenda”, an idea the Government supported fully.

In terms of the number and monitoring of persons with disabilities, he said the Government had developed “certain statistical numbers” and had a “certain plan to deal with this problem”.  It planned to submit a first report on the subject in May, he added.  As for the human resources of the National Human Rights Commission, he said there was a need to strengthen that body and increase its membership.

Regarding other issues, he said maternal protection was a high priority, with a special law having been enacted to combat domestic violence.  Plans were under way to “make a U-turn” in the Family Law and in terms of family relations.  Parliament would hear about those changes in its next session.  As for sexual harassment, a working group had been established to deal with the problem within the framework of the Criminal Code, he said.

Turning to the question of rights restricted during a state of emergency, the supporting laws should describe the provisions of the constitutional law in greater detail, he said, adding that he could provide a copy of those laws.  Draft legislation on the Second Optional Protocol had been submitted to parliament, to a legal standing committee and another security-related body, both of which had endorsed the draft legislation.  Parliament would consider the issue in its spring session and amend various laws, given the necessary approval.  As for public opinion on such matters, he said:  “We want to introduce a culture of supporting the abolishment of the death penalty.”  That would require the President to play an essential role, as such issues took time.

He said he did not recall any violations of the Covenant, but in such cases, people had a full right to file a complaint.  As for the number of torture complaints, the courts decided such cases and statistics were indeed available.  In November, Mongolia had discussed its report on the implementation of the Convention against Torture, he recalled, adding that the Government would revise the definition of torture in national legislation.  Meanwhile, it had enacted a law outlining compensation for torture victims, but the definition of torture would be “polished” to bring it in line with international treaties.  Regarding the General Investigation Unit of the Prosecutor’s Office, he said it was a “fairly new” institutional structure.  “Please be patient and don’t worry about these cases,” he urged, assuring the Committee that any abuse by the police would require the Prosecutor’s Office to step in.

He went on to state that the Government had recently received the observations and recommendations of the Committee against Torture, and would undertake to implement them with due diligence.  Mongolia had not established a separate independent body to investigate allegations of mistreatment and torture by police officers, he said, adding that he would welcome any professional advice from the Committee in that regard.

Regional training was being offered to police officers as a matter of high priority, he said.  The use of video and audio surveillance had resulted in an increasing number of cameras, but the question remained whether they were sufficient.  The video surveillance system in the detention centre currently under construction would be fully functional, he added.

Noting that the head of the National Human Rights Commission and a parliamentary subcommittee on human rights had visited the country’s detention centres, he said they were in the process of preparing their comments and the delegation was not currently in a position to comment.  Free legal counselling was provided to detainees through an advocates group, he said.

There was a discrepancy between the State’s position and reports on the number of suspects detained without court authorization, he said, suggesting that different definitions were being used or, perhaps, that the Commission had obtained wrong information.  All detention cases were handled according to court decisions, he stressed, adding that, while police officers had the right to detain a suspect, they must inform the court of such detention within 24 hours.  The court would then decide whether or not to release the detainee.

Responding to questions on special isolation, he said the minimum United Nations standards were applicable in Mongolia.  When a prisoner’s death sentence was commuted, it could be changed to a 30-year prison sentence, which could, in turn, be served in special isolation.  Recently, most had been in the regular regime, he said, noting that the cases of prisoners in special isolation would be reviewed on the basis of their disciplinary records.  Organizations like Amnesty International were able to visit special correctional facilities, he added.

He went on to say that representatives of the Prosecutor’s Office and the National Human Rights Commission could enter corrections facilities at any time.  The overcrowding situation was “more or less stable”, and the new detention centre, with a capacity of 1,000 people, would be functional within the year and meet international standards.  As a result, the Denjiin Myanga detention centre would be closed, he said, adding that the State planned to replace it within three years, if the necessary resources could be found.

Emphasizing that pretrial detention was no longer a police responsibility, he said a suspect could be detained for a maximum of 14 days.  However, when someone had already been sentenced, the maximum detention period was up to 24 months.  There was no provision for detaining minors beyond 12 months, he said, adding that any detention was reviewed after two months and expanded on the basis of “documentary proof”.  Detention periods also corresponded with the crimes committed, he added, noting that there was no detention for minor and less-serious crimes.

He said that, while the 30 per cent quota for women electoral candidates was no longer in place, many provisions supported them under the Gender Equality Law.  There was also a great deal of political will for women to hold higher political positions, he said, adding that a draft law on women’s representation would be considered during parliament’s upcoming session.

Stressing that Mongolia had no law on discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons, he said that there was very little understanding of the issue in the country and welcomed technical advice.  While there was no record of any formal organizations working against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons, they were negatively stereotyped, he said, suggesting that a public awareness campaign was needed on that front.

Experts’ Comments and Questions

Mr. IWASAWA, expert from Japan, said the delegation’s responses indicated its willingness to engage in a constructive dialogue.  While Mongolia had ratified the First Optional Protocol, the Committee had not registered any complaints from the country under that instrument.  Moreover, the delegation’s response that the Convention was not invoked in the courts might suggest that it was not well-known.  He asked again who appointed the National Human Rights Commissioner and on what basis — indeed, on whose recommendation — that appointment was made.

Mr. THELIN, expert from Sweden, noted that Mongolia had linked the cases of the 270 July 2008 defendants, and asked why the trials had taken place in different courts.  What criteria had been applied for grouping certain defendants together?  He also sought clarification as to whether all of those convicted had been required to pay damages for the demonstrating, in addition to personal damages to 250 police officers.  He requested further clarification on whether, once the prosecutor had put the case to the court, a conviction was assured.  If so, that left very little room for the trial, including for any acquittals, he said.

* *** *

__________

*     The 2783^rd Meeting was closed.

For information media • not an official record