B.Procedure followed in accordance with article 30 of the Convention and rules 58 to 64 of the Committee’s rules of procedure

61.The procedure for dealing with requests for urgent action submitted under article 30 of the Convention is as follows:

(a)Reception of the request by the secretariat of the Committee;

(b)Review of the request by the secretariat to ensure that it meets the basic requirements for registration. If it does not (if, for example, the person on whose behalf the request is submitted has reappeared), a letter is sent to the author explaining that the case falls outside the Committee’s remit under article 30 of the Convention. If the request refers to events in a State that is not a party to the Convention, the author will be informed that he/she can submit the request to the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances and a copy of the request will be forwarded to the secretariat of the Working Group. If there is insufficient information in the request, a letter is sent to the author inviting them to provide the missing information;

(c)Transmission of the completed request for urgent action to the rapporteurs;

(d)Dispatch of the note verbale to the State party: the State party is usually asked to send its observations to the Committee within two weeks. If the State party does not reply on time, a reminder is sent. After three reminders, the State party is invited to meet with the rapporteurs at the next session of the Committee, or else with the secretariat processing the request, with a view to reminding it of its obligations under article 30 of the Convention and analysing the problems encountered in respect of the request in question;

(e)Dispatch of a letter from the secretariat to the authors to inform them of the registration of the request and the Committee’s recommendations to the State party;

(f)Reception of the State party’s observations, which are forwarded to the authors for comment;

(g)Reception of the authors’ comments on the State party’s observations, analysis of the information collected and drafting of a new letter to the State party listing the Committee’s concerns and recommendations, with a request for additional information on measures taken in response to these recommendations (and possibly a request for interim measures). In general, the State party is given three weeks to respond. If the State party’s observations are not received within three weeks, a reminder is sent;

(h)Dispatch of a letter to the author informing them about the content of the letter sent to the State party;

(i)Reception of the State party’s reply, which is forwarded to the author for comment. Upon receipt of the author’s comments, a new note verbale is sent to the State party, highlighting the Committee’s concerns and recommendations with regard to the search for the disappeared person;

(j)In accordance with article 30 (4) of the Convention, requests for urgent action remain open “for as long as the fate of the person sought remains unresolved”.

C.Criteria for registration of requests for urgent action

62.General rule: requests for urgent action are systematically analysed in the light of article 30 (1) and (2) of the Convention. Each request is also immediately checked to ensure it contains the minimum information needed by the State party to identify the disappeared person. Authors are therefore required to include:

(a)Full name, date of birth and, if possible, a number that can be used to identify the disappeared person (e.g. identity card or driving licence number);

(b)Date of alleged disappearance;

(c)Place and circumstances of the alleged disappearance, including alleged perpetrators;

(d)Action taken to report the alleged disappearance to the authorities of the State in which the disappearance took place, or the reasons for not reporting it.

D.Requests submitted since the ninth session that failed to meet the registration criteria

63.Most of the requests for urgent action met the admissibility criteria when first submitted. However, 48 of the requests submitted were found not to meet these criteria and could not be registered for the reasons listed in table 2.

64.In every case that could not be registered, a letter was sent to the authors explaining what information was missing. This information was duly provided in 15 of the requests, which could then be registered. Those cases that fall within the remit of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances were duly transmitted to the secretariat of the Working Group.

Table 2Urgent action requests that were not registered since the establishment of the Committeea

Reason for not registering request	State party	Number of requests not registered for this reason
Events took place before the Convention entered into force for the State party	Mexico	3
	Morocco	2
Insufficient information provided (e.g. date of disappearance not given, incomplete name of victim, lack of information on complaints submitted to national authorities)	Mexico	41 b
	Cuba	1
Request inadmissible ratione materiae under article 30 of the Convention	Cuba	1 c
Request already registered by the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances	Peru	1
	Plurinational State of Bolivia	1
Request clearly falls within remit of Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances	Tunisia	2
	Egypt	1
	Greece	1
	Jordan	1
	Pakistan	2
	Rwanda	1
	Sri Lanka	2
	Syrian Arab Republic	1
	Ukraine	1
	United Arab Emirates	1
Total		63

a As at 18 March 2016.

b In 13 of these cases, the authors were able to supply the additional information requested and the requests for urgent action could be registered.

c The author claimed that he was “ disappeared ” for one day, but was “ back again ” .

E.Main challenges related to the criteria for registering urgent action requests since the ninth session

1.Urgent action requests registered on the basis of the contextual information supplied

65.On 9 September 2015, the Committee received 147 requests for urgent action related to disappearances that had occurred between 2009 and 2014 in six municipalities in the Mexican State of Guerrero. Those requests related to events that had taken place before the Convention entered into force for the State party were set aside. Given that there were no witnesses to most of the disappearances, the requests contained very little information on the facts in the cases submitted. However, the requests did contain very detailed information on the context in which the events took place, so that the State party was required to search for the disappeared persons in accordance with its obligations under the Convention. In view of this, 116 of the requests submitted were registered, classed by year of occurrence. The note verbale sent to the State party stressed that, taking into account the difficulty that families and relatives had in gaining access to detailed information on the circumstances of the disappearances as there were no witnesses to most of them, the events described were analysed in the light of the context in which they took place.

2.Urgent action requests registered following clarification of the steps taken to report the events to the competent national authorities

66.In some cases, the authors of the requests did not initially provide clear information on the steps taken to bring the case to the attention of the national authorities, as in the following cases:

(a)Example 1: the initial request did not include information on the steps taken to present the case to the competent bodies of the State party concerned, such as those authorized to undertake investigations, where such a possibility exists, in accordance with article 30 (2) of the Convention. Upon clarification of the steps taken, the request could be registered;

(b)Example 2: the authors said that the disappeared person’s wife had reported her husband’s disappearance but had taken no further action for fear of reprisals. The authors were asked to clarify the reasons for this fear. In the light of the information provided, the request was registered.

F.Interim measures granted

67.In most requests for urgent action, the authors ask for interim measures when they submit the initial request or in subsequent correspondence with the Committee. Three types of interim measure can be identified:

(a)Protection from threats for the authors of the request and for members of the disappeared person’s family;

(b)Protection for the authors of the request or other individuals in the course of their search;

(c)Protection of mass graves and other evidence.

68.Since the establishment of the Committee, 83 interim measures have been granted in the context of the urgent action procedure to victims’ families or representatives. The States parties concerned have also been asked to protect mass graves and evidence in connection with 11 registered requests for urgent action (see table 4).

G.The process after registration of urgent action requests: developments since the ninth session

1.Response from States parties

69.In the vast majority of registered cases, the States parties concerned have responded to the urgent action requests. In 15 cases, however, their replies did not contain relevant information and in 73 cases no reply had been received at the time of adoption of the report (see table 3).

Table 3Response to urgent action requests since the establishment of the Committee

State party	Requests registered	No response	Replies giving no information on the case
Brazil	1	-	1
Cambodia	1	-	1
Colombia	6	-	-
Iraq	51	26	13
Mexico	234	47	0
Total	293	73	15

70.The Committee is concerned about two kinds of situation where the replies did not contain relevant information:

(a)Request by the State party for additional information that is difficult or impossible to get: the State party asked the Committee to provide the four names of the disappeared person, the mother’s full name and a “good-quality” copy of the person’s identity papers. The State party also asked the Committee to systematically send such information in any future requests for urgent action. After consultations with the authors of the urgent action requests in question on the possibility of obtaining this information, the State party’s notes verbales were forwarded to the authors. In every case where the information was received, it was passed on to the State party, noting that the availability of the information requested could not be considered a prerequisite for registering the request for urgent action;

(b)Reply that does not provide the information: the State party replied: “there is no recent reference to the cases in question in the database of the Ministry”. The Committee sent a note verbale to the State party expressing its deep concern that, according to the information provided, the search for the disappeared person had been limited to checking the database of one of the competent ministries. The Committee noted that such checking was necessary but could not be considered sufficient in the light of the State party’s obligations under the Convention. In that connection, the Committee reminded the State party that, under article 12 of the Convention, each State party had to ensure that any individual who alleges that a person has been subjected to enforced disappearance has the right to report the facts to the competent authorities, which must examine the allegation promptly and impartially and, where necessary, undertake without delay a thorough and impartial investigation. Where there are reasonable grounds for believing that a person has been subjected to enforced disappearance, the authorities must undertake an investigation, even if there has been no formal complaint. The Committee also requested the State party to take all steps necessary to draw up and implement an investigation strategy to search for and locate the disappeared person.

2.Implementation of the Committee’s recommendations

71.It is not possible to determine the precise extent to which the Committee’s recommendations have been implemented. The secretariat’s contacts in the States parties concerned have reported that registering urgent action requests has had a positive impact in the cases reported, as demonstrated by the practical action taken by the authorities of the State party in question.

72.However, the Committee considers that the impact of the requests for urgent action could be improved through the systematic transmittal of the information on the requests to the authorities in charge of the search and investigation. As per the established practice, exchanges with the State party pass through the permanent missions, which relay the requests and related correspondence to the ministries of the interior of the States parties. In almost every case of a registered urgent action request, the Committee has been informed by the authors of the request that the bodies in charge of the search for the disappeared person and the investigation into their disappearance have not been informed about the urgent action request filed in the case for which they were responsible. In the majority of those cases, the authors of the requests have forwarded the information in their possession to the relevant authorities, who found the Committee’s recommendations very relevant to their own work:

(a)Action taken: the notes verbales sent to States parties include a request that the authorities involved in the investigations into the case in question be duly informed about the urgent action initiated by the Committee, as well as about the requests and recommendations transmitted to the State party, in accordance with article 30 (3) of the Convention;

(b)In view of the above, the Committee decided to propose the adoption of a mechanism of coordination, in parallel with diplomatic channels, through the identification of a point of contact in the capital and in general local authorities of interested States parties to have a more efficient channel of communication with the authorities in charge of the relevant cases.

3.Implementation of the interim measures granted

73.The implementation of interim measures has been variable, as reflected in table 4.

Table 4Implementation of interim measures since the establishment of the Committee

Type of interim measure granted	Country	Number of interim measures granted	Interim measures implemented
Protection against threats for authors of urgent action requests and/or members of the disappeared person’s family	Mexico	Two (mothers of two disappeared persons)	No
	Mexico	Two (members of the disappeared persons’ families)	Yes
	Mexico	One (mother of the disappeared person)	Yes
	Colombia	Five (family members threatened)	Yes
	Mexico	Three (family members threatened)	No
	Mexico	Six (family members)	No
	Mexico	Nineteen (family members of the disappeared persons)	Under way
	Mexico	Four (family members of the disappeared person)	Under way
Protection of the authors of the urgent action request or other persons in the course of the search	Mexico	Two (mothers of two disappeared persons)	Under way
	Mexico	Thirty-nine (members of the disappeared persons’ families taking part in the search)	Under way
Protection of mass graves and other evidence	Mexico	Places identified as possible locations of mass graves or human remains of relevance to the case in question	Under way
	Mexico	Three mass graves located in the area where the events took place	Protection measures adopted for grave where exhumation has already been carried out; repeated request for protection of the other two graves
		Bodies found in one of the graves	No

74.As regards the urgent action requests for which the interim measures granted have not been implemented, three situations can be distinguished:

(a)The authorities in charge of the case at the local level have not received the Committee’s request for interim measures and are taking no action to protect the individuals in need of protection:

(i)Example: the authors of the requests say they have not received the protection of the State party’s authorities and reiterate their request for interim measures;

(ii)In its subsequent note verbale to the State party, the Committee repeated its request for interim measures and requested the State party to ensure that the authorities involved in the investigations into the cases in question were duly informed about the urgent actions initiated, as well as about the requests and recommendations transmitted to the State party, in accordance with article 30 (3) of the Convention;

(b)The State party considers the protection measures and support requested to be inappropriate. A note verbale was sent to the State party reiterating the Committee’s request for support for the victims;

(c)The State party tells the Committee or the victims that the interim measures granted by the Committee are not binding. A note verbale was sent to the State party recalling that, under the principles of international law, accession to the Convention requires the State party to cooperate in good faith with the Committee, with a view to taking all necessary measures, including interim measures, to locate and protect the disappeared person and to guarantee the protection of the informant, the witnesses, the relatives of the disappeared person and their counsel, as well as others involved in the investigation, against any ill-treatment or intimidation on account of the complaint submitted or any statement made (Convention, arts. 30 (3) and 12 (1) and (4)).

H.Interaction with the authors of urgent action requests

75.The secretariat is in constant contact with the authors of urgent action requests, mainly by means of letters sent on behalf of the Committee, but also more directly by e-mail and telephone. On the basis of these exchanges, the trends set out below can be observed.

76.Several authors have highlighted the importance of having the support of the Committee, in which they have finally found a listener after having no success with the national authorities.

77.In these exchanges, the authors also reveal their despair at the lack of progress in the search for the disappeared persons and in the related investigations. In such cases, many ask for the Committee’s help in their efforts to obtain institutional support in their day-to-day lives. The secretariat responds to all such requests, while clarifying the limits of the Committee’s mandate. On two occasions, the authors of the requests were put in contact with the OHCHR offices on the ground and, after prior consultations, with an NGO supporting the victims of enforced disappearance.

78.In the case of some of the urgent action requests registered, the authors did not send their comments on the State party’s observations. This prevented the Committee from moving forward with the requests. However, in accordance with the principle set out in article 30 (4) of the Convention, the urgent actions are still open and reminders have been sent to the authors.

I.States parties’ understanding of their obligations under the Convention

1.Confusion between the search for the person and the investigation of the crime

79.In their replies, States parties often confuse the search for the person and the investigation of the crime. In such cases, the Committee has sent a note verbale recommending that the State party: (a) draw up and implement a plan and strategy for the search for the victims, taking account of the Committee’s recommendations as set out in the note verbale; and (b) draw up an investigation scenario, being careful not to confuse efforts to determine the fate and whereabouts of the victims and the investigation into the crime.

2.Lack of due diligence in the investigation and ignorance of how to investigate an enforced disappearance

80.The vast majority of replies from States parties reveal worrying shortcomings in the way that investigations are carried out. The Committee has observed inadequate or incomplete search mechanisms, as well as shortcomings in the actual investigations.

81.In such cases, the Committee has sent a note verbale to the State party flagging the shortcomings in the search and investigation mechanisms and recommending that they be improved and that the available information be taken into account in a strategic effort to locate the disappeared person.

J.Suspended or closed urgent action requests

82.The Committee has not suspended or closed any of the urgent action requests registered since the ninth session. This means that, at the time of writing, the Committee has suspended, in accordance with its criteria, two urgent actions and closed one.

83.The applicable criteria (agreed by the Committee in a plenary meeting at its eighth session) are as follows:

(a)An urgent action is suspended when the disappeared person has been located but is still detained;

(b)An urgent action is closed when the disappeared person has been located and released, or the remains of the victim have been found;

(c)An urgent action is kept open when the disappeared person has been located but the persons for whom interim measures have been granted remain under threat.

Chapter XICommunication procedure under article 31 of the Convention

85.On 20 September 2013, the Committee registered its first communication under article 31 of the Convention and initiated the corresponding procedure (see CED/C/10/D/1/2013). At the ninth session, the Special Rapporteur presented the status of the communications submitted to the Committee. At its tenth session, the Committee examined communication No. 1/2013 (Yrusta v. Argentina) on the merits. It concerned Roberto Yrusta, a prisoner in Argentina, whose family was denied any information about his whereabouts for a period of around seven days, during which he was moved from a prison in Cordoba to one in Santa Fe Province. The Committee found that Mr. Yrusta had indeed been subjected to enforced disappearance as he could not communicate with his family, nor consult a lawyer, and as the authorities concealed or refused to acknowledge whether he had been transferred despite repeated requests from his relatives. In its decision, the Committee reaffirmed that there was no temporal element for an enforced disappearance and that a secret detention could take place also in an official prison, for example when the authorities do not provide information about the detainee.

Chapter XIIVisits under article 33 of the Convention

86.On 17 March 2016, the Committee, recalling the previous exchange of correspondence with Mexico, which had started in May 2013, decided to reiterate the request it first made in 2014 to visit the State party in the framework of article 33 (1) of the Convention. The Committee proposed visiting Mexico in January, February or April 2017 and asked the State party to reply by 1 July 2016 in order to proceed with the administrative arrangements for the visit.

Annex I

Membership of the Committee on Enforced Disappearances and terms of office as at 18 March 2016

Name of member	State party	Term of office expires
Mohammed al-Obaidi	Iraq	30 June 2017
Santiago Corcuera Cabezut	Mexico	30 June 2017
Emmanuel Decaux	France	30 June 2019
Maria Clara Galvis Patiño	Colombia	30 June 2019
Daniel Figallo Rivadeneyra	Peru	30 June 2019
Luciano Hazan	Argentina	30 June 2017
Rainer Huhle	Germany	30 June 2019
Suela Janina	Albania	30 June 2019
Juan José López Ortega	Spain	30 June 2017
Kimio Yakushiji	Japan	30 June 2017

Annex II

Decisions adopted by the Committee on Enforced Disappearances at its ninth and tenth sessions

A.Decisions adopted by the Committee during its ninth session

9/I.The Committee decides to adopt the Guidelines against Intimidation or Reprisals (the San José Guidelines).

9/II.The Committee decides to send a letter to the Netherlands reminding it to provide information in follow-up to the concluding observations of the Committee.

9/III.The Committee decides to adopt the lists of issues on Burkina Faso, Kazakhstan and Tunisia.

9/IV.The Committee decides to adopt the concluding observations on the reports submitted by Iraq and Montenegro under article 29 (1) of the Convention.

9/V.The Committee decides to appoint the co-rapporteurs for the next report on follow-up to concluding observations.

9/VI.The Committee decides to appoint the country rapporteurs who will draft the lists of issues related to the reports of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Colombia, Cuba, Ecuador, Gabon and Senegal and who will lead the constructive dialogues with the States parties concerned.

9/VII.The Committee decides to adopt the informal report on its ninth session.

9/VIII. The Committee decides to adopt the provisional agenda of its tenth session.

B.Decisions adopted by the Committee during its tenth session

10/I. The Committee decides that any draft document relating to its activities under the Convention and requiring discussion and adoption by the Committee — including any document related to: reporting (such as draft concluding observations, draft lists of issues and draft reports on follow-up to concluding observations), urgent actions, individual and inter-State communications, country visits, the mechanism to address widespread or systematic enforced disappearances, legal interpretations (such as draft general comments and draft formal statements) and working methods and other matters (such as draft annual reports, draft rules of procedure and draft guidelines) — must be translated into the working languages of the Committee.

10/II. The Committee decides to adopt the common methodology for consultations for the elaboration of general comments, as outlined in the report of the Chairs of the human rights treaty bodies on their twenty-seventh meeting (see A/70/302, paras. 91-92).

10/III. The Committee decides to establish a working group charged with revising the rules of procedure, the guidelines on reporting for States parties and the internal guidelines based on the evolution of the jurisprudence in concluding observations.

10/IV. The Committee decides to send reminders to States parties that have not submitted a report within two years of the entry into force of the Convention as required by article 29 of the Convention.

10/V. The Committee decides to adopt the lists of issues on Bosnia and Herzegovina and Colombia.

10/VI. The Committee decides to adopt the concluding observations on the reports submitted by Burkina Faso, Kazakhstan and Tunisia under article 29 (1) of the Convention.

10/VII. The Committee decides to appoint the country rapporteurs who will draft the lists of issues related to the reports of Albania and Lithuania and who will lead the constructive dialogues with the States parties concerned.

10/VIII. The Committee decides to adopt its annual report to the General Assembly at its seventy-first session.

10/IX. The Committee decides to adopt the informal report on its tenth session.

10/X. The Committee decides to adopt the provisional agenda of its eleventh session.

Annex III

List of documents before the Committee at its ninth and tenth sessions

CED/C/9/1Annotated provisional agenda of the ninth session

CED/C/9/2Report on follow-up to concluding observations of the Committee on Enforced Disappearances

CED/C/10/1Annotated provisional agenda of the tenth session

CED/C/IRQ/1Report submitted by Iraq

CED/C/IRQ/Q/1List of issues in relation to the report submitted by Iraq

CED/C/IRQ/Q/1/Add.1Replies to the list of issues on the report submitted by Iraq

CED/C/IRQ/CO/1Concluding observations on the report submitted by Iraq

CED/C/MNE/1Report submitted by Montenegro

CED/C/MNE/Q/1List of issues in relation to the report submitted by Montenegro

CED/C/MNE/Q/1/Add.1Replies to the list of issues on the report submitted by Montenegro

CED/C/MNE/CO/1Concluding observations on the report submitted by Montenegro

CED/C/BFA/1Report submitted by Burkina Faso

CED/C/BFA/Q/1List of issues in relation to the report submitted by Burkina Faso

CED/C/BFA/Q/1/Add.1Replies to the list of issues on the report submitted by Burkina Faso

CED/C/BFA/CO/1Concluding observations on the report submitted by Burkina Faso

CED/C/KAZ/1Report submitted by Kazakhstan

CED/C/KAZ/Q/1List of issues in relation to the report submitted by Kazakhstan

CED/C/KAZ/Q/1/Add.1Replies to the list of issues on the report submitted by Kazakhstan

CED/C/KAZ/CO/1Concluding observations on the report submitted by Kazakhstan

CED/C/TUN/1Report submitted by Tunisia

CED/C/TUN/Q/1List of issues in relation to the report submitted by Tunisia

CED/C/TUN/Q/1/Add.1Replies to the list of issues on the report submitted by Tunisia

CED/C/TUN/CO/1Concluding observations on the report submitted by Tunisia

CED/C/1Rules of procedure

