Human Rights Committee

100th session

Summary record of the 2749th meeting

Held at the Palais Wilson, Geneva, on Thursday, 14 October 2010, at 10 a.m.

Chairperson:Mr. Iwasawa

Contents

Consideration of reports submitted by States parties under article 40 of the Covenant (continued)

Fourth periodic report of Jordan (continued)

The meeting was called to order at 10.05 a.m.

Consideration of reports submitted by States parties under article 40 of the Covenant (continued)

Fourth periodic report of Jordan (continued) (CCPR/C/JOR/4; CCPR/C/JOR/Q/4 and Add.1; HRI/CORE/1/Add.18/Rev.1)

At the invitation of the Chairperson, the delegation of Jordan took places at the Committee table.

2.The Chairperson invited the delegation of Jordan to continue with its replies to the questions asked by Committee members at the previous meeting.

3.Mr. Masarweh (Jordan) said that the State Security Court comprised both civil and military judges and that their independence and neutrality were guaranteed. They were appointed on the basis of their qualifications and experience and received in-service professional training. No judge had ever been obliged to leave his or her post before retirement age, nor had any judge ever been forced to retire because of judgements he or she had pronounced. The State Security Court applied the rules of criminal procedure in the same way as the civil courts. All decisions handed down by the Court could be appealed before the highest court in the Kingdom, the Higher Court. The latter comprised civil judges, whose independence was guaranteed by the Independence of the Judiciary Act. The Council of Judges, which was presided over by a judge, was responsible for issues concerning the appointment and transfer of judges. Under national law, when the public prosecutor decided to bring proceedings, he was required to refer the case to the relevant court within a reasonable period of time. With the amendments made to the Code of Criminal Procedure in 2009, the powers of prosecutors had been limited and the maximum length of pretrial detention had been established as one week for minor offences and 15 days for criminal offences. In exceptional cases and in the interest of the investigation, pretrial detention could be extended. Obligatory pretrial detention had been abolished for criminal offences. The decision to place an individual in detention was now left to the discretion of the judicial authority, which did not order such detention unless it was absolutely necessary for the investigation.

4.The Prevention of Terrorism Act of 2006 did not grant any exceptional powers to law enforcement bodies. All decisions made in application of that law were made by the judicial authorities and were subject to scrutiny by higher judicial authorities. Thus far, no one had been brought to trial under that law. The General Intelligence Department operated in accordance with the legislation governing its activities, and its mandate was well known and official. It cooperated with civil society organizations working in the field of human rights. Those NGOs frequently organized seminars and training sessions on the provisions of international instruments, national legislation concerning human rights and the treatment of detainees, and invited representatives of the General Intelligence Department and the Public Security Directorate to attend those sessions.

5.Detention in police stations was regulated by legislation governing the prison system. It was not possible to make an arrest without a warrant. Police detention centres were monitored by the judicial authorities and were inspected by bodies such as the National Centre for Human Rights and the International Committee of the Red Cross; those bodies drafted reports and sent them, inter alia, to the Ministry of the Interior, which made every effort to follow up on the recommendations made.

6.Mr. Alshishani (Jordan) said that the Ombudsman and Human Rights Office had been established on 21 July 2005 within the Public Security Directorate. The Ombudsman reported to the head of the Public Security Directorate and enjoyed the same legal authority as members of the Public Prosecutor’s Office. The Ombudsman and Human Rights Office was responsible for handling violations committed by law enforcement officials. Its staff made unannounced visits to penal establishments to ensure that detainees were not ill-treated, that they enjoyed the guarantees provided for in the Covenant and that the law was observed. In 2009, the Ombudsman and Human Rights Office had received 299 complaints, 26 of which had been for ill-treatment; 10 of them had been transferred to the police court, and in 6 cases the perpetrator had been sentenced to imprisonment or dismissal. The cases of ill-treatment that did occur did not in any way reflect State policy. The Public Security Directorate worked in partnership with civil society organizations involved in the defence of human rights, and in 2009, many joint activities had been organized, such as workshops, training sessions and campaigns to raise awareness of human rights among law enforcement officials, particularly regarding the rights of detainees.

7.Ms. Ajwa (Jordan) said that the law required prosecutors to visit the detention centres within their jurisdiction at least once per month to ensure that no one was illegally detained. The prosecutor checked the centre’s register along with the arrest warrants and detention orders, made copies of those documents and interviewed all the detainees. The prosecutor was required to take note of any complaints by detainees. The prison staff must cooperate with the prosecutor and provide him or her with all the necessary information. Any detainee could submit an oral or written complaint to the prison staff, and those complaints must be filed in a register and sent immediately to the prosecution service. Anyone who had knowledge of a case of illegal detention must notify the prosecutor, who upon verification would immediately order the release of the detainee. It was planned to hold training sessions to improve the skills of prosecutors on such issues. A special unit had been established within the Ministry of Justice to ensure that persons detained in reform and rehabilitation centres were treated in accordance with the standards in the various international instruments ratified by Jordan. The unit made periodic visits to the centres and provided legal assistance to detainees who had been victims of ill-treatment.

8.The Constitution of Jordan guaranteed the independence of judges, who acted solely on the basis of the law. The Independence of the Judiciary Act set out the rules to be followed for verifying the qualifications and moral standards of judges. The Council of Judges recruited judges through a competitive examination and was the only body with the authority to dismiss a judge. The Justice Development Strategy for 2010–2012 included a section on strengthening the impartiality of justice.

9.Mr. Awamleh (Jordan) said that the commitment of King Abdullah II to strengthen programmes protecting women, children and persons belonging to vulnerable groups had resulted in the adoption of Act No. 6/2008, known as the Protection from Family Violence Act, and amendments to the Criminal Code in 2010. The Government had conducted a thorough study of cases of ill-treatment reported by social services. Social services offices had been opened in 2009 within family protection centres in a number of governorates. The family reconciliation centres, established at Queen Rania’s initiative, offered family mediation services and sheltered battered women; 806 women had received care in 2009, compared to 299 in 2008. Work had begun, in cooperation with the University of Columbia, on devising a training programme for social workers; workshops had been organized to raise awareness of violence against women and to provide training on the Protection from Family Violence Act; and, in 2008 and 2009, seminars had been held especially for staff working in health, rehabilitation and education services.

10.Juvenile courts were responsible for handling criminal cases involving minors. When an offence was committed jointly by a minor and an adult, the case was tried by a special court. Measures were taken to protect the minor, and a behaviour monitor from the Ministry of Social Development was responsible for conducting a social study on, inter alia, the minor’s living conditions, schools grades and family environment. The behaviour monitor was present during the proceedings and ensured that the minor’s best interests were taken into consideration.

11.Ms. Ajwa (Jordan) said that “honour killings” were classified as serious offences. Since the amendment of the Criminal Code in 2010, perpetrators of such acts could no longer invoke article 98 of the Code to plead that they had been in a state of fury in the hope of obtaining a more lenient sentence.

12.Mr. Lallah said that article 14 of the Covenant guaranteed suspects the right not to be compelled to testify against themselves and the right to be presumed innocent. He asked whether, in a case where a defendant claimed that his or her confession had been extracted under duress, the court would order the prosecution to prove that the confession had been spontaneous and had not been obtained by force or other illegal means.

13.It was good that the Jordanian courts had not heard any cases concerning the Prevention of Terrorism Act, but he wondered whether anyone had been arrested under that Act and, if so, what had become of them.

14.Mr. Thelin asked for clarification concerning the discretionary power the Prime Minister allegedly had to refer any case to the State Security Court, despite the regulations set out in the Code of Criminal Procedure.

15.Mr. Amor asked whether the far stricter conditions under which polygamy was allowed introduced in 2010 constituted an attempt to limit the practice and a step towards its elimination.

16.Mr. O’Flaherty said that he wished to know whether, aside from the legislative amendments the delegation had mentioned, any public awareness or information campaigns were conducted to change prevailing attitudes towards honour killings in society.

17.Mr. Salvioli said that, as the State party had recognized, certain deep-rooted cultural practices could be incompatible with human rights norms, and that the perpetrators of acts of torture and acts of domestic violence often enjoyed impunity. He asked what measures the Jordanian authorities planned to take to promote the full respect for human rights in society. He wished to know what percentage of complaints of acts of torture led to legal proceedings and what percentage of acts of domestic violence resulted in sanctions.

18.Mr. Bhagwati asked whether senior members of the judiciary were appointed by the executive or by an independent body, how any influence by the executive was eliminated in the appointment procedure, and whether judges were strictly appointed for life or whether it was possible to indict a judge. In the affirmative, it was important to know what the procedure was, and whether it was conducted by an independent body. He requested further information on the juvenile courts, their jurisdiction, the cases they heard, the decisions they could pronounce and the remedies available appealing those decisions.

19.Mr. El-Haiba asked what measures the Government planned to take to abolish completely administrative detention and administrative detention centres, which were non-official places of detention that were distinct from penal establishments and were not governed by any regulations. He said it seemed that a number of women victims of violence were being held in those centres.

20.He asked what new elements were included in the recently adopted Anti-Human Trafficking Act and to what extent that Act was in conformity with international norms on protecting the rights of persons belonging to the most vulnerable groups of society, particularly the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography.

21.Sir Nigel Rodley requested further information concerning the judicial review of administrative detention. He wished to know in particular whether the observance of procedure as well as the grounds for decisions taken were subject to review.

22.Regarding the treatment of detainees, it would be interesting to have further details on the inspection of police detention facilities, particularly on the bodies authorized to visit those facilities, the restrictions that might be imposed on them and the use made of their reports. It was worrying that the only body authorized to examine the complaints of detainees denouncing acts of torture or ill-treatment was the Ombudsman and Human Rights Office of the Public Security Directorate, which came under the control of the law enforcement services. He would welcome the delegation’s comments on that point and an explanation of the follow-up given to complaints, including whether there had been any prosecutions.

23.The State party’s written replies stated that the National Centre for Human Rights had made several unannounced visits to the detention centre of the General Intelligence Department in the past three years, though not as many as the International Committee of the Red Cross. It would be interesting to know whether there was a limit on the number of such visits and to hear about their results. Were the reports of the National Centre for Human Rights made public?

24.The Chairperson invited the delegation to reply to the Committee’s additional questions.

25.Mr. Twal (Jordan) said that to date no cases had been tried under the 2006 Prevention of Terrorism Act. The cases in progress involved offences classified under the Criminal Code.

26.Ms. Ajwa (Jordan) said that confessions obtained under duress could not be admitted as evidence during proceedings, and that the judicial authorities were required to establish the circumstances under which each confession was obtained, in order to ensure that the statements of the accused had been made freely and spontaneously.

27.Mr. Twal (Jordan) said that the Government was willing to re-examine any of its legislative provisions on human rights and the rule of law, and that it was open to all recommendations as part of the vast political, legal and judicial reform process it had undertaken. Regarding the role of the Prime Minister in the work of the State Security Court, he explained that the Prime Minister could intervene only in cases concerning State security from a purely economic standpoint, which to date had happened only once.

28.Mr. Twalbah (Jordan) said that the figures submitted on polygamy covered couples who were separated or awaiting divorce, so they were higher than the actual figures. The Personal Status Act of 2010 included provisions intended to restrict polygamy by setting out clear conditions for the practice. The Act protected the rights of the two wives by requiring the husband to inform both of them of his other marriage and to provide them with the same material support. The obligation to maintain equity between wives was also enshrined in sharia. The minimum age for marriage was 18, but in special circumstances a judge could authorize the marriage of minors, provided that they had reached the age of 15, and subject to their consent and that of their parents. That exception was intended to cover all possibilities and when it was applied, which was rare, it was most often in cases of young people who were nearly 18 years of age.

29.Mr. Twal (Jordan) said that it was difficult to provide figures on domestic violence because many women did not report the ill-treatment they suffered. Measures were being taken to raise awareness among women and to encourage them to report domestic violence. Information campaigns had been broadcast by the media, and many programmes were conducted by civil society to change behaviour and prevailing attitudes and to provide support for victims.

30.The age of criminal responsibility had been raised from 7 to 12 years, notably to follow up the recommendation made by the Committee against Torture in April 2010.

31.Ms. Ajwa (Jordan) said that the delegation would provide the Committee with further information in writing on the system for appointing judges, along with a copy of the Independence of the Judiciary Act. The Council of Judges comprised the President of the Court of Cassation, the Chief Public Prosecutor and the most senior Supreme Court judge. The executive did not intervene in the appointment of the Council members, which was done taking into account their seniority.

32.Mr. Twal (Jordan) said that Act No. 9 of 2009 criminalized all forms of trafficking in persons. The Act, which had been drafted with the help of international experts, contained a definition of trafficking that was in full conformity with that of the Palermo Protocol. It called for harsher penalties if the victims were women or children. Furthermore, all efforts were made to protect the victims and prevent them from being prosecuted themselves. A national committee to combat trafficking was to be established under the auspices of the Ministry of Justice. A national reference guide containing various tools and recommendations to help combat trafficking was currently being drafted.

33.The Act regulating administrative detention would soon undergo reform. The Government was aware of its responsibility to effect change in society in order to put an end to certain harmful practices. That being said, it must consider the traditions and prevailing attitudes at the origin of certain types of behaviour. In a few cases, recourse to administrative detention was essential, including for the protection of women in certain circumstances. In all cases, individuals placed in administrative detention had the right to consult a lawyer immediately.

34.The International Committee of the Red Cross had ready access to the authorities and was in frequent contact with the General Intelligence Department and the Police Department. The Government was open to all forms of judicial, financial and technical assistance, including for the purposes of providing training and improving its legislation.

35.The Chairperson invited the delegation to reply to questions raised by the Committee member concerning paragraphs 14 to 25 of the list of issues.

36.Mr. Twalbah (Jordan) said that the right to freedom of religion was enshrined in article 14 of the Constitution. All Jordanian citizens had the right to choose and practise their own religion. It was the State’s responsibility to protect the freedom of worship and religion and to guarantee the exercise of that right, provided that doing so did not jeopardize public order, public morality or public security. The lack of restrictions on religion was also enshrined in the Koran. With regard to Baha'is, Jordan was one of the most tolerant countries in the region towards that community. Baha'i were free to practise their religion without restrictions or harassment. Nothing was done to force them to adopt another religion or belief. All Jordanian citizens, regardless of their religion, could exercise their civil and political rights. The Civil Code and the Personal Status Act of 2010 guaranteed the right of all Jordanians over the age of 16 to possess their own identity cards, regardless of their language, ethnic origin or religion.

37.Mr. Twal (Jordan) said that individuals belonging to the Baha'i faith could declare that faith as their religion on their identity cards, even though it was not recognized in the Constitution. There was no mention of ethnic origin on identity cards. Stating one’s religion was required only on identity cards; that information did not appear on passports, drivers’ licenses, or any other official identity document. In addition to the practical reasons at the origin of that requirement — the need to know the religion of parliamentary candidates in order to draw up the list of candidates in accordance with the quotas laid down by law — it should be understood that both Christians and Muslims were deeply proud of their religion, and neither group felt that they were stigmatized by being identified as such.

38.Since the amendment of legislation governing the press and media, the Department of Publications was now under the authority of the Ministry of Culture rather than the Ministry of Information. The prison sentences previously imposed for media offences had been replaced by fines. The State Security Court was no longer competent to handle media cases, which were now judged by a special chamber of the civil courts established for that purpose. Cases against journalists accused of harming diplomatic relations or the royal family had been dropped at the King’s request. A training institute had been created to help journalists improve their professional performance without engaging in self-censorship. All legislation regulating the media would be reviewed in the near future. Jordan was a voice of moderation and tolerance and an advocate of peace. It had launched many initiatives in that regard, such as the Amman Message, which recalled that respect for others was a fundamental value of Islam. Jordan also promoted intercultural and interreligious dialogue and would soon adopt a national action plan to promote dialogue and openness in schools, universities and the media. The Public Assemblies Act of 2008 had not been adopted to restrict the right of assembly, but rather to organize how that right was exercised, in order to prevent the risk of gatherings getting out of hand. All gatherings must be authorized by the governor, who was required to justify his or her decision in the event of refusal. The ground for refusal most often invoked under the law was undermining public order. The decision was subject to appeal before the Supreme Court, which had jurisdiction over all administrative decisions. At the time of Israel’s attack against Gaza in 2008, protest marches had been organized throughout the country; the law had been applied and the protests, which had been properly controlled, had gone off without incident.

39.Mr. Awamleh (Jordan) said that under the Associations Act of 2008, the authority responsible for examining applications for registration of an association had 60 days to issue its decision, from the date the application was submitted. After that date, the application was considered as accepted. If an application was rejected, an appeal could be lodged before the courts. Since the law had entered into force in 2008, only one application for registration had been rejected; the applicants had appealed against the decision and their application had ultimately been accepted. The right of associations to accept funds or donations was not subject to any restrictions when the donors were Jordanian. On the other hand, any foreign funding must be approved by the Government. Several criteria must be met in order for such funding to be approved: it must be legal and compatible with public order and public morals, it must be compatible with the association’s rules of procedure, and it must be intended to realize the association’s objectives. The Government had 30 days from the date of submission to issue its decision. After that date, the request was considered as accepted.

40.Ms. Ajwa (Jordan) said that a review of legislation relating to children had been undertaken to ensure that it was in keeping with international standards. The Labour Code prohibited the employment of children under age 16. Minors above 16 years of age could work, provided they submitted a medical certificate issued by a doctor and an authorization form signed by their parents. Working conditions for those minors were subject to strict regulations; for example, it was forbidden to engage minors in dangerous work, their working day was limited to six hours, and holidays and weekends must be observed. The trafficking and exploitation of minors were severely punished by the Anti-Human Trafficking Act of 2009. In order to combat such practices, a comprehensive strategy had been set up involving protection and assistance for victims along with prevention and suppression measures. The use of children in the production of pornographic materials was punished by law.

41.Mr. Twal (Jordan) said that under the legislation governing political parties of 2007, a political party could be registered only if it comprised at least 500 founding members. To date, no request for registration had been rejected. In accordance with the Act, each registered party received State funding. Measures had been taken to improve the way the political parties operated. For example, training courses had been organized for them on issues such as management techniques, transparency and communication with the media, with the support of experts from national and international NGOs.

42.Increasing the participation of women in political life could not be reduced to a matter of quotas; it required a profound change within society. Considerable progress had been made in access to health and education for women, but they were still mostly excluded from economic and political life. The implementation of provisions, including legal provisions, to promote greater participation among women was certainly essential, but direct action must also be taken to encourage the necessary mobilization and commitment among the primary stakeholders. Action along those lines was being taken by the Ministry of Political Development in cooperation with civil society. The changes to the electoral system provided for in the interim law on elections adopted in May 2010 were intended to guarantee greater transparency and increased representation. Another positive sign of change was the Government’s decision to authorize monitoring by international observers of the upcoming parliamentary elections to be held in November 2010. The Ministry of Political Development had established an ambitious plan for political and legislative reform for the period 2011–2020, with a view to strengthening good governance and respect for international human rights standards. From a demographic point of view, it was true that there were minorities in Jordan, but it should be understood that the individuals belonging to those minorities did not think of themselves as such; they considered themselves above all as Jordanians. That very strong national sentiment was a bastion against the insularity and ghettoization seen in other countries.

43.There were no specific measures in place to inform people about the Covenant, but human rights were at the heart of many Government actions, and information about them was disseminated through school curricula and the media.

44.Mr. O’Flaherty said that, in its replies on freedom of religion, the delegation had spoken mostly about religious groups, while the Covenant placed emphasis on the individual rather than collective exercise of freedom of religion, and consequently on the possibility for each individual to join a religious group or not. With that in mind, it would be useful to know how the regulations on apostasy were applied. While it was true that apostasy was not illegal in Jordan, making it possible to abandon Islam for another religion, the written replies suggested that certain rights were taken away from aspostates, which could raise issues under article 18 of the Covenant. Noting each person’s religion on identity cards could be useful in ensuring the respect of quotas to benefit religious minorities in parliamentary elections, but one might question its compatibility with the Covenant’s provisions on the right to privacy; it was entirely possible that an individual might not want his or her religion revealed. He asked if it was correct that atheists or individuals who did not belong to one of the three main monotheistic religions practised in Jordan could enter “none” in the field for religion on their identity cards, and if it was true that Baha'i must state their religion as “Muslim”.

45.In its review of its legislation on freedom of the press and freedom of expression, the State party should endeavour to ensure that all provisions of that legislation were in keeping with article 19 of the Covenant, particularly with regard to the conditions under which freedom of expression could be restricted. Requiring a license to operate electronic media was legitimate for technical reasons, but there was no justification for requiring prior authorization for print media. Jordan’s legislation still contained a number of restrictions on freedom of the press. Thereby, journalists could be held criminally responsible for writing articles that were considered to be harmful to the country’s diplomatic relations or to the royal family. Such provisions should be abolished.

46.Mr. El-Haiba said that neither the State party’s report nor its written replies contained any information on measures the State party had taken or planned to take to combat racial hatred, violence and discrimination. No country was immune from those phenomena, which required not only legal measures but also awareness-raising programmes intended to change behaviour and prevailing attitudes. Regarding the representation of women in public and political life, in its concluding observations from 1994 on the third periodic report of Jordan, the Committee had noted with concern that gender inequality still existed both in practice and in law, including with regard to participation in public life. It would be useful to know what measures had been taken to address that shortcoming, prevent discrimination against women, combat gender bias and liberate Jordanian society from the weight of certain traditions that jeopardized women’s rights.

47.The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination had noted in 1999, as had the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women in 2007, that there were shortcomings in legislation and in practice concerning the suppression and prevention of racial discrimination and sex discrimination. While it was important to adopt provisions to combat discrimination of all kinds, training and awareness-raising programmes were just as necessary. Workshops organized by the State party on combating violence, hatred and discrimination were therefore a step in the right direction, and the results of those efforts must now be evaluated.

48.Regarding the representation of women in public and political life, he wished to know how many women currently held seats in the Senate, how many served as judges, how many held executive posts in the public and private sectors and in universities, and how many led political parties or belonged to their governing bodies.

49.Regarding measures taken to guarantee free and transparent elections, the National Centre for Human Rights, which had recently been awarded the task of helping to monitor elections, had observed irregularities during the municipal elections that might have affected the election results. He wished to know what had been done in follow-up to those findings.

50.Mr. Amor said he was concerned that the minimum age to join a political party was 21. The quota system adopted for parliamentary elections gave minorities greater political rights than would be “warranted” based on the proportion of the population they represented, which was commendable. He wished to know whether minorities could teach in public schools. He also wondered whether the National Centre for Human Rights and national NGOs had participated in the drafting of the State party’s report and whether the public had been informed that the report was being considered by the Committee.

51.Mr. Thelin said that he wished to know whether the Compulsory Military Service Act, as amended when reinstated in 2007, contained provisions stipulating the procedures to be followed in cases of conscientious objection. If not, he asked what measures were planned to give effect to article 18 of the Covenant. He also asked whether the People’s Army was still operational and whether individuals called to serve in it could exercise their right to conscientious objection.

52.Mr. Twalbah (Jordan) said that, with regard to apostasy, both sharia and the Constitution of Jordan recognized and guaranteed freedom of religion and freedom of worship, and that it was therefore the Government’s duty to protect those rights. Consequently, an individual who abandoned Islam for another religion was not subject to any criminal sanctions. Apostates enjoyed all civil and political rights without exception. Regarding the right to inheritance, under sharia nothing prevented a testator from naming an apostate as universal legatee, and nothing in the written provisions of sharia prevented a testator from disinheriting an apostate; the testator’s will must therefore be respected.

53.Mr. Twal (Jordan) said that, with regard to freedom of expression, the creation of electronic media was not subject to any prior authorization, as evidenced by the veritable proliferation of that form of media in the country. His delegation took note of the Committee’s observations on the need to abolish restrictions on freedom of the press. With regard to the representation of women in public and political life, women currently held 7 of the 55 seats in the Senate. In the judiciary, there were currently 67 women acting as judges, which represented 8.8 per cent of all judges. Many Jordanian universities had adopted quotas in favour of women at all levels. In addition, for the past five years the Government had taken gender equality issues into consideration when establishing the budgets allocated to the various ministries. There was a department for gender equality within the Ministry of Planning and International Cooperation. In the Ministry of Political Development, of which he was the Secretary-General, one woman held the position of deputy secretary-general and four held director posts; also, more than half of the supervisors in the Ministry were women. Regarding the representation of women in political life, two political parties were headed by women. Regarding the minimum age for joining a political party, he said that the matter would be taken up in connection with the reform of the Act governing political parties. Conscientious objection was not an issue in Jordan, because military service was not compulsory in the country; as for the People’s Army, it had been dissolved.

54.The delegation of Jordan thanked the Committee for having drawn its attention throughout the enriching dialogue to the crucial issues that deserved closer examination. It looked forward to receiving the Committee’s concluding observations and recommendations, to which it would pay the utmost attention.

55.The Chairperson thanked the delegation of Jordan for its replies to the Committee’s many questions and for its frank and fruitful dialogue with the Committee. He invited the delegation to send in writing as soon as possible its replies to the questions that it had not had time to answer, so that they could be taken into consideration in the concluding observations.

The meeting rose at 1 p.m.