Committee against Torture

Eighty-third session

Summary record of the 2214th meeting

Held at the Palais Wilson, Geneva, on Thursday, 13 November 2025, at 3 p.m.

Chair:Mr. Heller

Contents

Consideration of reports submitted by States Parties under article 19 of the Convention (continued)

Seventh periodic report of Argentina(continued)

The meeting was called to order at 3.05 p.m.

Consideration of reports submitted by States Parties under article 19 of the Convention (continued)

Seventh periodic report of Argentina (continued) (CAT/C/ARG/7; CAT/C/ARG/QPR/7)

At the invitation of the Chair, the delegation of Argentina joined the meeting.

The Chair invited the delegation to continue replying to the questions raised by Committee members at the 2211th meeting.

A representative of Argentina said that his delegation continued to be deeply concerned that many of the questions raised by Committee members appeared to be based on false reports. Since President Milei had taken office in December 2023, a large number of non-governmental organizations had sought to impede the Government’s work and had denounced the new Administration’s policies before international organizations. Specifically regarding the issue of memory, truth and justice, none of the allegations cited by the Committee were true. Furthermore, the previous Administration had not only granted reparations to people who did not meet the relevant criteria, but had also left some 25,000 applications pending, a failure that amounted to a denial of justice. The Secretariat for Human Rights, which had become overrun by representatives of ideological organizations, had not been dismantled, but rather had been transformed into a subsecretariat in order to optimize its work and staffing. The National Memory Archive and the Navy School of Engineering Place of Remembrance Museum had been placed under the authority of the International Centre for the Advancement of Human Rights, and their location, staffing and functioning had not changed since the Secretariat’s transformation.

The country’s collective memory of past events should be neither biased nor truncated. In that connection, it was important to recognize the more than 1,000 victims of guerrilla group attacks, including members of the armed and security forces, diplomats, politicians, judges and children, in the 1970s; those victims also deserved justice, given that, according to the International Criminal Court, such crimes against humanity were not subject to statutory limitations. Under the reparations laws currently in force, a total of 18,644 applications, including 3,435 for cases of detention and 2,322 for cases of exile, were being processed. Since January 2024, 64 payments had been made pursuant to Act No. 25.914. In 2025, 560 ministerial decisions had been adopted in the framework of reparations laws, and 227 payment orders had been referred to the Ministry of Economic Affairs. All such information was publicly available upon request, as were all statistics concerning the Dr. Fernando Ulloa Centre for Victims of Human Rights Violations, which provided services such as psychotherapy and mental health evaluations. However, certain organizations were not interested in the truth, as was obvious from their categorical refusal to even call into question the often-quoted claim that 30,000 people had disappeared during the military dictatorship between 1976 and 1983.

A representative of Argentina said that the protocol to be followed in the event of demonstrations involving the obstruction of public highways, as set out in Decision No. 943/2023 issued by the Ministry of Security, was aimed not at restricting fundamental rights, but rather at upholding the rights of all citizens, including the freedom of movement, access to basic services and public safety. An electoral promise had been made in 2023 to address the large numbers of demonstrations, mainly in urban areas, that disrupted the lives of everyday citizens, and the current Administration was intent on fulfilling that promise. The protocol was based on the Constitution and on article 194 of the Criminal Code; given the shared oversight of constitutionality in Argentina, had there been an issue of constitutionality, a judge, prosecutor, organization or individual would have raised it. In any event, the protocol did not authorize the indiscriminate use of force. On the contrary, it set out clear, gradual actions that were subject to judicial oversight and in line with the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. Law enforcement personnel always used non-lethal weapons. Physical force or similarly dissuasive means could be used only when there was an obvious risk to the safety of people or property, and it was to be used as a last resort in all situations. The right to peacefully protest was guaranteed in Argentina.

Decision No. 704/2024 had not been adopted in order to expand the use of force, but rather to regulate the use of non-lethal weapons, in line with the principles of necessity, proportionality and legality and the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. Under the protocol set out in Decision No. 943/2023, law enforcement officers were to first attempt to warn a person to stop committing an offence. If the person did not follow the officer’s orders, the officer informed the person that he or she was disobeying an order and then used force gradually, as appropriate. Federal forces received mandatory and continuous training in human rights, including on the progressive use of force in crowd control techniques. The actions of police officers were documented, including through video recording. Any incidents involving the excessive use of force were immediately investigated by the relevant authorities and referred to external oversight institutions, such as the national mechanism for the prevention of torture. The use of less-lethal weapons required training, supervision and mandatory registration, and any excesses were investigated immediately.

Any deprivation of liberty required a court order or a situation of flagrante delicto, in line with articles 18 and 19 of the Constitution and international human rights treaties. Any detention must be legally founded and registered immediately. There were no vaguely defined offences, the prosecution of which might lead to arbitrary detention. Any irregularity was investigated immediately, and law enforcement personnel received continuous training in international human rights standards. In fact, 30 per cent of the training given to those assigned to peace missions abroad related to human rights and international humanitarian law. Training also covered the protection of civilians, in particular the protection of women and other vulnerable groups.

There was no systematic persecution of judges in Argentina. The conduct of Judge Sebastián Sarmiento, in the Province of Mendoza, would be assessed by an impeachment panel established under articles 164 and 165 of the Constitution of the Province of Mendoza. That panel was functionally independent and comprised 21 members, including 7 members of the Supreme Court of Mendoza, 7 senators and 7 deputies.

There was a zero-tolerance policy for institutional violence in any form. Any act of torture or ill-treatment constituted a serious offence to be investigated immediately and impartially. Individual complaints had led to the institution of proceedings and the opening of administrative inquiries. Mechanisms for ensuring immediate access to legal aid from the outset of detention were being strengthened, in coordination with the Public Defence Service, and independent medical teams were being trained in line with the Manual on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Istanbul Protocol). Independent medical professionals were often called in to verify injuries. Physical and psychological examinations must be carried out upon a detainee’s admission to prison, and the results were included in the detainee’s case file. Prison personnel were given targeted training in human rights, including on dignified treatment and the prevention of torture. The Government actively cooperated with international mechanisms, informing them of progress made in the prevention of torture and ensuring that every case of torture or ill-treatment was investigated, documented and punished according to the law. The Federal Advisory Council on the Training of Police and Prison Personnel, comprising representatives of the State and of the 24 provincial jurisdictions, ensured that police and prison personnel received the same basic training, including human rights training on the proportional use of force and prevention of torture.

Any violation of the rights of persons deprived of their liberty constituted a serious offence under article 144 ter of the Criminal Code, and those found guilty of torture could be sentenced to between 8 and 25 years’ imprisonment, or even life in prison if the victim had died as a result of his or her injuries. Less serious violations that nonetheless involved abuse or degrading treatment were punished under articles 144 bis and 144 quater of the Criminal Code, which provided for prison sentences and general disqualification from public service for life for State agents. Administrative and disciplinary investigations could also be conducted by the Ministry of Security. The Office of the Prosecutor for Institutional Violence could institute criminal proceedings against State agents and oversaw the execution of sentences. Lastly, victims had the right to comprehensive reparations, including compensation, rehabilitation and guarantees of non-repetition. A number of such cases had been brought in recent years, demonstrating the continued commitment of Argentina, including of the current Administration, to punish torture and prevent impunity for crimes, whether they were committed by civilians, politicians or police officers.

A representative of Argentina said that prison occupancy exceeded prison capacity by 5 per cent. The construction of prison unit No. 36 in Coronda had recently been completed. Several facilities, including a specialized unit for the treatment of sex offenders, had been expanded. New prisons were being built throughout the country, in accordance with national and international standards, including a prison complex with a capacity of 2,500 prisoners in the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires. It was against government policy to convert spaces designed to facilitate social reintegration, such as workshops and gymnasiums, into cells. Prison overcrowding was also being addressed through the use of non-custodial measures such as electronic tags. A total of 6,000 tags had been distributed to courts in all provinces, including the Province of Buenos Aires, without discrimination on the basis of political differences. The Government remained committed to improving the prison system to ensure that no prisoners were subjected to conditions that undermined their human dignity.

Since the new Government had taken office, the percentage of prisoners in pretrial detention had fallen from 43 to 39 per cent. The high proportion of unconvicted prisoners was partly due to the fact that the right of appeal was strictly guaranteed. A defendant was not considered convicted until his or her sentence had been confirmed by a higher court.

A general protocol on searches of prisoners and prisons had been drawn up, in consultation with the relevant bodies, and was now in force in federal prisons. The protocol covered all searches, regardless of the circumstances in which they were carried out. It was based on national and international standards, including the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Nelson Mandela Rules). The protocol was mandatory and could be invoked by prisoners in legal complaints against prison staff. Its purpose was to protect inmates, prison staff and visitors by preventing the introduction and circulation of prohibited items through searches performed in accordance with the principles of legality, necessity and proportionality and with due regard for human dignity and human rights. It provided for comprehensive daily searches of all areas of prisons, inspections of security equipment and the use of technology such as scanners. The protocol would be presented in the Federal Advisory Council on the Training of Police and Prison Personnel, which included representatives of all police and prison services in the country, to ensure that it was implemented throughout the prison system.

The Government had also issued guidelines on the procedure to be followed by prison officers if they suspected prisoners or visitors of carrying an illegal or prohibited item internally or attached to their body. The guidelines included a number of safeguards against ill-treatment. They required, for example, that incidents should be reported immediately to a judicial authority and that arrested persons should undergo a medical examination.

Decision No. 35/2024 providing for the establishment of a comprehensive management system for high-risk prisoners had been adopted to end a reign of terror by drug traffickers. In 2023, there had been 189 murders in the city of Rosario alone. The Office of the Ombudsman for the Prison System and the judicial authorities conducted regular visits to facilities for high-risk prisoners. There were 132 such prisoners, representing 1.8 per cent of the prison population, and 13 persons had been removed from the system for high-risk prisoners. The system was subject to continuous judicial monitoring, pursuant to annex I of Decision No. 35/2024, which established the need for communication between the Federal Prison Service and the judicial authorities on the designation of inmates as “high risk”, the removal of inmates from the system and the transfer of inmates from one facility to another. Prisoners who had been classified as “high risk” could lodge an appeal with the enforcement judge or file an application for habeas corpus. To date, more than 900 applications for habeas corpus had been filed. In 2024, judges in several different cases had ruled that the measures imposed under the system for high-risk prisoners were compatible with the relevant national and international standards and did not constitute a breach of prisoners’ rights. There was no truth to the claim that high-risk prisoners were held in worse conditions of detention than other prisoners. The system had the support of not only the judiciary but also the voters, as the recent elections had shown.

Concerns regarding healthcare in prisons were due in part to the fact that previous administrations had underfunded prison health services. All prisoners throughout the country had access to comprehensive healthcare, including specialist treatment, mental health support and dental care. Primary healthcare was provided on site by interdisciplinary teams. Upon admission, prisoners attended an initial consultation that covered their general state of health and medical history, among other things. They received guidance on healthy habits and access to healthcare during incarceration. Prisoners with complex health problems were referred to hospitals in coordination with the competent health authorities and in compliance with the relevant safety and bioethics protocols. There were plans to draw up a framework agreement to improve coordination between the prison authorities and the public health services. Since 2022, the use of telemedicine had been increased to ensure that prisoners’ needs continued to be met despite resource constraints. A programme for the prevention of HIV/AIDS and sexually transmitted infections in prisons was being carried out, and prisoners with HIV/AIDS had access to antiretroviral drugs. Gender-affirming hormone therapy was available to prisoners in accordance with the Gender Identity Act. Prisoners with disabilities were provided with comprehensive care and support.

Training on the Istanbul Protocol was provided to prison officers, including as part of a specialized in-service training course on healthcare in prisons. The course placed particular emphasis on international law and human rights standards and covered not only the Istanbul Protocol but also the Nelson Mandela Rules and the Principles and Best Practices on the Protection of Persons Deprived of Liberty in the Americas. To date, the course had been completed by 289 participants from different areas of the country.

A representative of Argentina said that judicial independence had been undermined by a previous Government that had sought to have all members of the Supreme Court prosecuted because it had disagreed with the Court’s rulings. The situation involving Judge Sebastián Sarmiento, in the Province of Mendoza, was very different, however. Since the case had not yet been tried, it was impossible to say what the outcome would be. Judge Sarmiento would not be removed from his position unless he was found guilty. The Government’s role was not to prejudge cases and seek convictions but to establish mechanisms that facilitated the administration of justice and helped to establish the truth. Proceedings had been brought against Judge Sarmiento not because the Government disagreed with his rulings but because he had made several decisions that had had serious consequences. For example, he had ordered the release of several prisoners who had gone on to commit violent crimes, and he had suspended the removal of mobile telephones from inmates, enabling those who were members of criminal organizations to order murders from inside prison as a form of protest against their imprisonment.

With regard to trafficking offences, the Committee’s line of questioning was surprising. Over many years, and across successive Governments of different political leanings, Argentina had been committed to combating trafficking in persons, in particular for the purpose of sexual exploitation. That commitment had involved coordinated efforts by multiple State entities, which formed the Federal Council to Combat Human Trafficking and Exploitation. Various entities in the executive branch had specialized expertise in investigating and combating trafficking in persons. They included the Ministry of Security, the federal security forces and other bodies such as the National Migration Directorate, the Labour Secretariat, in its capacity as labour inspectorate, and even the tax authority, since it monitored compliance with labour regulations and had staff to carry out inspections focused on trafficking in persons for the purpose of labour or sexual exploitation. They all worked to prevent, investigate and report cases of trafficking in persons. Once a case had been reported, the Public Prosecution Service and provincial and federal courts became involved. At the national level, there was a specialized prosecutor’s office, the Office of the Prosecutor for Human Trafficking and Exploitation, whose work had been commended nationally and internationally.

Thanks to those coordinated efforts, over 400 guilty verdicts had been handed down, and over 1,000 persons had been convicted, since the enactment of the currently applicable legislation in 2008. Since 2020, over 200 guilty verdicts had been handed down. The year 2021 had seen a large number of convictions, owing to the specific circumstances in the country at the time, namely the quarantine situation during the coronavirus disease (COVID‑19) pandemic, and the use of new tools to conduct trials online. The number of guilty verdicts had decreased slightly in subsequent years. Between January and July 2025, there had been 21 guilty verdicts, with 40 persons convicted, and it was expected that the figures for 2025 as a whole would surpass those for 2024. The verdicts handed down in 2025 would be the result of work done by the authorities over the preceding years. Progress had been made in combating specific forms of trafficking, such as trafficking for the purpose of online sexual exploitation. Earlier in 2025, a person who had exploited three women had received a lengthy custodial sentence. The country’s efforts to combat trafficking had been recognized internationally, including in a report by the Department of State of the United States of America.

Mr. Contesse (Country Rapporteur) said that the Committee was composed of independent experts who were nominated and elected by States Parties. It was guided not by political considerations, but by its mandate under the Convention to periodically examine the implementation by each State Party of its obligations thereunder. The Committee was not using false data and was certainly not attacking the State Party. The Committee had received a large number of submissions from civil society organizations and State entities, many of which corroborated each other, and all of which had been uploaded to its web page. When the Committee asked States Parties to comment on information contained in such reports, it was careful to do so without prejudging the information’s veracity. To ensure that a dialogue was constructive, both the Committee and the State Party had to engage in good faith.

His question about the transformation of the Secretariat for Human Rights into a subsecretariat had not concerned the legitimacy of that decision but, rather, the matter of optimization of resources. According to information received, the transformation had resulted in the dismissal of approximately half of the entity’s staff; he invited the delegation to comment on the veracity of that information. It would be helpful if the delegation could comment on reports that, in 2025, no budgetary resources had been allocated for memorial sites.

The State Party had a long history of cooperation with the International Criminal Court, had been one of the key States involved in drafting the Rome Statute and was a regional leader in that regard. In addition, the delegation had emphasized that the State Party had no tradition of impunity for offences such as torture. Given that record, it was striking that, in the General Assembly, Argentina had recently voted against the adoption of resolution 80/6 on the report of the International Criminal Court. In the light of article 5 of the Convention, he wished to know what had caused the State Party to adopt a position that appeared to signal a lack of support for the Court at a time when it was being challenged by certain States.

The delegation had indicated that the purpose of the protocol on demonstrations was not to restrict fundamental rights. However, when assessing such measures, it was important to look beyond their purpose to take into account appropriateness, necessity and proportionality. The Committee had received information from many sources, including photographs of injuries, indicating serious violations of the fundamental rights of persons participating in marches. While the Committee understood that the protocol was not always applied during the policing of marches, it had been used in the context of “mass” marches such as that of March 2025. He wondered how it was determined that a demonstration was a “mass” demonstration and how it was decided that the protocol was to be applied. If it depended on the number of persons in attendance, how were they counted? He wished to know how the State Party ensured that such categorizations were not arbitrary and that the application of the protocol did not lead to restrictions on the content of demonstrations. A democratic Government should not take the position that certain demonstrations were permitted, whereas others might be permitted by law but limited by other means.

Concerning the right to protest, which, as the delegation had noted, was a fundamental right guaranteed under the Constitution of Argentina and international treaties, Ministry of Human Capital Decision No. 84/2024 provided that persons participating in marches would lose social welfare benefits. He would be grateful if the delegation could explain the rationale for that rule and comment on reports that, in February 2025, an administrative court had granted an injunction to partially suspend its application. Could a person who disagreed with a public policy protest against it without running the risk of losing coverage?

He would appreciate information on the methods used to evaluate the effectiveness of the training provided to law enforcement officials on the non-lethal weapons protocol. As all operations were recorded, and the footage was a key source of evidence, it would be useful to receive information on cases in which violations had been detected through such video evidence, upon receipt of complaints or even on an ex officio basis. How many such cases had there been, what investigations had been carried out and what was the current status of those cases?

While judicial independence per se was a matter that fell under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Committee was interested in the use of executive decrees to appoint judges to the Supreme Court, which was a practice generally not seen in constitutional democracies. The Committee’s concern related not to the legality of the practice but to its possible impact on judicial independence. If he understood correctly, the process of appointing a judge required the approval of the Senate, with a two-thirds majority. However, if those who held political power had the authority to appoint a judge to serve on the Supreme Court on a temporary basis, it was reasonable to assume that the judge in question might not act in an impartial manner. That would clearly be an infringement of judicial independence.

It remained unclear whether the removal process faced by Judge Sarmiento in the Province of Mendoza was related to misconduct, given the guarantee of tenure that must be upheld for judges, regardless of the substance of their decisions. He would appreciate information on the case of Judge Andrade, which he had mentioned the previous day.

The delegation had noted that there were no vague legal provisions that permitted arbitrary detention. However, the Committee had been informed that persons arrested in the context of demonstrations were usually charged with offences of undermining or resisting authority under article 239 of the Criminal Code. That provision had been used to detain the 114 persons who had been released by Judge Andrade. According to the Provincial Commission on Memory of the Province of Buenos Aires, the security forces had arbitrarily detained demonstrators, most of them on criminal charges related to undermining or resisting authority or property damage, which would seem not to require prolonged detention.

It would be useful if the delegation could provide more detailed information on institutional violence, in particular on the nature of the judicial proceedings under way to ensure accountability and on administrative inquiries. As the defendants in such cases were reportedly represented by lawyers from the Federal Prison Service, he wished to know whether such an arrangement did not create a risk of institutional bias.

Mr. Buchwald (Country Rapporteur) said that the Committee did not deny the need to maintain security. However, as the delegation had itself repeatedly emphasized, while security was important, so too were human rights. The Committee’s questions on issues such as prison overcrowding, which the delegation had identified as a problem, had been focused on how the Government was navigating that balance. Such an approach reflected the Committee’s routine line of questioning. The Committee had asked about healthcare in prisons, and the delegation had acknowledged that there was a concern. He fully agreed that it was important to address healthcare issues more broadly, looking beyond the prison system, and would urge the State Party to ensure that the medical service was part of the general health system, independent from the prison service.

In its concluding observations on the seventh periodic report submitted by the State Party under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC/C/ARG/CO/7), the Committee on the Rights of the Child had expressed concern regarding proposed legislation that would lower the age of criminal responsibility, stringent criminal penalties for minors, the high number of children in detention centres, sometimes in locations distant from their families, and living conditions in detention centres. It would be helpful to learn whether the delegation accepted the validity of such concerns and, if it did, to receive information on any tangible steps taken in that regard. In addition, he would be grateful for further information on the so-called therapeutic communities in Buenos Aires for substance abuse and on reports that persons living in such communities had essentially been involuntarily confined, that they had been subjected to physical and verbal violence, that the number of psychologists and psychiatrists was often insufficient and, in particular, that there was no proper oversight.

The Committee had repeatedly highlighted the need for a single national register of persons subjected to deprivation of liberty, including in its previous concluding observations (CAT/C/ARG/CO/5-6). In the recommendations formulated following its visit to the State Party in 2022, the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment had made a recommendation relating to the register. The Committee would be grateful for information on steps taken to establish and maintain the single national register and to ensure that the information was up to date and readily accessible. In the light of the concern expressed in the Committee’s previous concluding observations about the methodology used to calculate prison occupancy rates, it would be useful if the delegation could explain the State Party’s current methodology in that regard. For example, what surface area per detainee was used as the basis?

He invited the delegation to expand on its earlier statement that the constructive dialogue should move beyond bureaucratic rigidity to focus on concrete and verifiable results rather than procedural formalities. In particular, he wondered whether there was anything specific that the Committee should do differently, in the view of the delegation, to facilitate genuinely constructive dialogue and whether such “procedural formalities” included due process safeguards. His intention was not to criticize that statement but to understand the intention behind it.

Mr. Iscan said that he supported Mr. Contesse’s comments on the manner in which the Committee conducted constructive dialogues. When referring to information received from external sources, the Committee was careful to characterize it as “alleged” or “reported”. In response, the delegation could provide its own version of events and correct any inaccuracies.

He had not claimed that the Navy School of Engineering Place of Remembrance Museum had been closed. That said, it had been reported that the number of days a week on which the museum received visitors would be reduced by two. In his initial comments, he had noted that memorial sites had been affected by budget cuts, which might affect their capacity to preserve historical records. What had in fact been ended, pursuant to Ministry of Defence Decision No. 680/2024, and on the basis of arguments that it was para-judicial in nature, was the work of the working group conducting research using the archives of the armed forces.

Mr. Liu said that the State Party had made commendable progress in introducing legislation, policies and mechanisms to combat trafficking in persons. To take their efforts a step further, the authorities might wish to consider establishing a pathway for the prosecution of companies and legal entities that engaged in acts related to trafficking in persons, as well as enacting legislation to address illegal adoption.

The meeting was suspended at 5.15 p.m. and resumed at 5.25 p.m.

A representative of Argentina said that the information that had been provided to the Committee by civil society organizations was false. In basing its questions on such information, the Committee was essentially placing the burden of proof on the delegation and asking it to defend itself against politically motivated allegations. As he had already explained, the report under review had been drafted by the previous Administration, whose approach had been diametrically opposed to that of the current Government.

With regard to General Assembly resolution 80/6, only 94 Member States – fewer than half of the total number – had voted in favour of it. He stood by his earlier comments on the case law of the International Criminal Court regarding the imprescriptibility of crimes against humanity, including those committed by guerrilla groups.

The Government had inherited a very precarious financial situation from the previous Administration and, as a result, had been forced to take extreme measures to reorganize and modernize the State machinery. The Ministry of Justice had issued Decision No. 27/2025 establishing a voluntary separation scheme, with the aim of optimizing resources. The National Memory Archive had been one of the least affected entities within the Ministry, and steps had been taken to ensure the preservation and protection, using modern security systems, of the archives, including those relating to missing persons and victims of State terrorism.

A representative of Argentina said that none of the reports received by the Committee concerning injured protesters made reference to any of the 200 police officers who had been hurt while attempting to maintain order during demonstrations in 2025. Historically, police officers who were injured in such circumstances tended not to lodge complaints. The protocol regulating the use of force by law enforcement officials to control protests was undoubtedly proportional to the risks such officials faced in the course of their duties. The authorities guaranteed the right to engage in peaceful protest; violent behaviour in such settings would not be tolerated, and law enforcement officials had the right to defend themselves if they were attacked. The offence of resisting authority had long been established in the Criminal Code and was well defined. Notwithstanding the occasional lapses that occurred in specific circumstances, police officers received robust training on the need to respect human rights. There was no impunity for any officers who committed offences.

A representative of Argentina said that, while reports concerning one mass demonstration had claimed that 2,500 people had been injured, fewer than 2,500 had even participated in the protest, which had allegedly been in support of pensioners’ rights. The protest had been infiltrated by groups of organized football hooligans, known as barras bravas, with links to drug trafficking and extortion. The figure of 2,500 had been cited by Posta de Salud y Cuidado, an organization that had emerged with the sole purpose of attacking the policies of the current Administration.

In the area of combating trafficking in persons, 82 per cent of cases were brought to trial. Although there were currently no provisions under which legal entities could be held to account specifically for the offence of trafficking, other provisions on related offences, such as money-laundering, could be applied. In a large number of related cases, assets had been confiscated from perpetrators and had been used to compensate victims.

Federal law enforcement officials, including prison guards, who were charged with committing a criminal offence in the exercise of their duties were entitled to receive the services of a defence lawyer provided by the entity employing them. Such officials were entitled to the same due process guarantees as everyone else, including the presumption of innocence. They were not provided with a public defender because doing so might give rise to a conflict of interest, since the Public Defence Service might also be representing the alleged victim in the case.

The Chair said that, in the course of its preparation for State Party reviews, the Committee met with national human rights institutions and national preventive mechanisms, as well as non-governmental organizations and entities within the United Nations and regional systems, all of which provided useful input. The interactive dialogue provided an opportunity for Governments to provide updates on important events and achievements in the implementation of the Convention since the submission of the relevant report.

A representative of Argentina said that, during the dialogue, his delegation had, at times, been subjected to ideologically motivated questioning based on information provided by organizations that opposed the current Administration, which had received a democratic mandate from the Argentine people. His Government was committed to protecting rights and ensuring that order was maintained on the streets.

The meeting rose at 6.05 p.m.