Annual report of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances

1^83 Lh( |Tor¡eing Cro ip cent, i nu id its activities nu nev presents its fourth report to the Commission. £r h^s again tatcen full accou.it of the points made oy représentatives aring the toi., issLon's aerate, or ^his subject in Feûruary 198C . Since ILS inception, following the adoption of resolution 20 fXXXVl) w '.he Co тип ^ J ion on шт< n Rights in Fe -ru. ry JVBlS, the »'or<ing Group has been attempting tn deal r Lth this sensitive subject in a practical way. The families of isappo irt c 1 persons have hac ih'^r hopes raises jy the creation ^rui continuation of the G-oup Governments ho which allegations of clisppearances have been t ranbiuitte^ ""ay, at i ель с initial!/, have i narei that they were oeing blamed for or accused of che disappearances. To the extent that cases have been clarified (see chapters 11 and iV), the relatives h a w Ю Р П informed.' For other families the Group's work пы/ have contributed towarns mf^rmiag them of what happened to Irhei*" re] tive. \et man/ ancoiv'Oa LQSPO remain. ihe numoei or .w/ cases in 1?ЬЗ is anout the same as in 1982. As for Governments, it is some yea rs since reader^ ere >emitiúe' that the mere transmission of a case ,oes not imply tnat any judgement whatsoever has been formed about it. All that has occurred is rhat tht Group ñas exanuaed uhe allegation, choc .eu that: it fails within the mandate and applied fhe United Nations rules of admissibility; certain cases arc dropped it Lhis stage, out j 11 Lhose /hich <sre admissible are transmitted to the Government concerned, as the only authority able to carry out the necessary investigation. Further oeLails ••! the Group's activities dnd its methods of work appear m chapter 1.

There are t"o common factors hich remain. LU some countries сisappearance^ continue to occur, whilst elsewhere older cases have come to light. The Group's approach to all the cases has continued to De oased scrupulously on the humanitarian approach, and this seems to have met with wide and Lucrea ing recognition. The co-oper-Lion of bovernmeats has accordingly, in most cases, been riaintan.ed or increased. Equally organizations representing the fcimilies of the disappeared have continue^ their co-operation tind have made various suggestions aimed at enhancing the Group's eificacy, which have been taken into account.

"'he ionncit of the report resenbles that presented l.iot ear. Representations from ill sides have been summarized аь carefully as possible, in order to make the report more rea ¡J -le. These summaries contain no judgements or conclusions by tae Group. At the thirtv-ninth session of the Commission the statistical presentation in the Group's previous report os criticised, not \^i thout just iJ iccition. So a new formulation has now been adopted which, it is hoped, "ill ~>p сЬ'ге 1'. In elition to «ach country mentioned in chapter II, it is possible to see how many cases have been transmitted, on how many the Government has giv^n a response, and hou many have jeen resolved (chat is to say, solved to the о itтsfaction of the Group's judgement) from either Governmental cr other sources. For ьото recent cas^s Lhere nas not yet been time for the Government to vespenn.

i'lbjopoit'lrnent hao с-он о .pressed i a certain qi'diters xooac the paucity of r e s u l t ? a n . j v e d , lio\je\crJ expe^^af ion.j> of the Grouo ! s chances of success have to De v j e ' V m t i p ^ÜJLPXL ¿Z th^ p-obiom utseii rind tne limitations inherent in the relatioiiG oí *:ht United ^,'ations i'i th Member S t a t e s , The Working Group has ha^ to dapt Lt^^li to . h^se jealii ie. , ond to see!c to mace progress within them.

ihe effect on the families of disappeared persons, ooth in terms of violation of their human rights and the acute psychological problems involved, have been discussed in each preceding report, and more information is given in chapters V and VI belov. The human factor has been extensively explained in previous reports. Even so, misunderstanding persists about the Group's methods of work. It is a prerequisite of all case-work in United Nations organs that standards of admissibility must be observed; this includes a requirement that sufficient information should be available to enable a Government to make appropriate inquiries. That is why, in certain passages in this report, as before, there are references to cases in which the source of the allegation is being requested to provide further information. Constructive criticism is always welcome and the Group is aware of the concern which arises where fully detailed cases are transmitted without any result. This concern is shared oy the Group and the problem will continue to be addressed.

The conclusions and recommendations at the end or the report express the Group's current preoccupations and suggestions, and should be read in the light of what is said in this introduction. Similarly, the report should not be read in isolation from the three earlier reports; on the contrary it is a supplement to them, and full account should be taken of the four uocuments together.

The Commibsior on Human ,vif>hts in ils resolution 20 (XXXVI) of 29 February 19 80 decided to establish , Working Group consibttng .-f five of its uembers, to serve as experts in their individual capacities, to examine questions relevant to enforced or mvoiuntarv disappearances <JL persons and to present i report.
In 198-. , 1982 and 1983 the Commission extended the mandate of the Working Group he first three reports of -he onung Group re contained m documents E/CN.4/1435 and Ac'd.l, E/CU.ц/1492 ana Add . L and Е/СЫ.ч /1983/14. The present repori is bubmj-tted m accordance i i th Commission resolution 1983/20 of 22 February 1983 uhich i.as approved hv the Economic and Social Council in its decision 1983/14, of 17 л,у i 'SJ. the i'et.rership <i the forking Gi oup is a;> follows: discount CoLvilLe of Culiosf. (Jn'ted Kingdom) (Chairman/Rapporteur); Mr. Jonas 4.D. Fo IÍ (Ghj.ir.); i;, Агп i Hilaly iAikislan); ur. Тула losevski 'Yugoslavia;; and Mi. Luis A. Várela QUT ros (Costa Rica).

rnis year the 'orbing tru íp ias ^clcl tnr je sessions; the tenth session, from LJ to 17 June i983, held at United Nations Headquarters, and the eleventh and twelftn bespiond, both hi in ar Lhij united atione Office at Geneva, from 26 to 30 September and f_om 5 to -- December i.983 -espectivel у.

Л*" the time c»f the ¡idootLon o£ the l(or¡jnt Group's u.st report" it had before it a considerable volume of information which had not yet been analysed and jince f hen я. continuous ^ ' ofj oí. < ríe* nation on eniorce<- or involuntary disappearances has been received. The Working Group continued to review cases submitter to it ,. oA eziuel tc Lrcinsmii i-eports on some ¿5390 disappearances to the Governments oi 15 countries together witn its requests for information. With regard to those сгьез rot t^diis Tnitteu to bovernnentb, the Group either decided to -eek n rthei micrmaLion from the sourc* of the report, or found that the report did n t appear ¡o ínll \ tnni ILS mandate. In addition, the Group continued Lo press por answers to outstanding cases transmitted earlier»

Juri'ig i°f3 the v,hnirinan conlinuet., in accordance ' ri th trie estal>iisned prDCodare, to rransnM*t urge ч reports of enforce^ or involuntary disappearances, received oet^een чеэззолз of the Group <-na requiring jumeciate action, to the Government of tne country concerned together Vv4th a request that the Government provide such informai 1" о u JS .L tig 1 t wish. 0^ the 2.390 reports transmitted to Governments mentioned above, some 555 were transmitted in accordance with this procedure. AS tne present report indicates, in a number or these .ases the Group was informée bv Governments ônd non-governmental sources that the person reported misting had ле^п released or as oeing neld in officially recognized detenti on ^1» xhe teports i eceived by tho Group en- 1 suomitte ' by relatives, persons closely connected 7itíi the disappeared person or organL.2ationb acting on their behalf. The Group Sas al no received t ifon>'ation from íauiviuuols 4ho reported vj tnessing rhe arrest or abduction of a inissmg person, or stated that they were letained "iih misbirg per.cor s LÎ1 cent-геь of detention, as .oil as from one persor чЬо * 1 aimed knowledge of disappearances from his official position in the past.

The Working Group attempted to Heal • ith all the reports of disappearances on which specific information was available and instructed the Secretariat to seek additional 'nformation '/hen sufficient details were not received. Bearing in mind the objective of clarifying cases through investigations and making efficient use of national investigation resources, the ^roup selected for transmission to Governments only those cases for which there was factual material on /hich an investigación could oe oased. This metnou of fork can result in a discrepancy between uhe number of disappearances reported by the Working Group with regard to ч given country and the nunwer reported elsewhere.
Consideration has been given to ал attempt to isolate the figures relevant to 1 U83 in the statistics; this nas pro/ed impossjioie, since, ior example, certain cases resolved in 3 98"* were transmitted in 1982 or earlier. The figures therefore represen: the totality of the Group's work..

As in the past, tne infornation received from Governments regarding cases of disappearances was oeat on Lc the relatives concerned; and their attention was called to the Commission's request for discretion as to the use of such information. 3u anaries of the reports t>ent LO Governments and copies of the information provided bv them are available with the Secretariat for consultation by members of the Commission.

During its tenth, eleventh and Luelftn sessions, the working Group met representatives of the following Stales; Argentina, tíolivia, El Salvador, Nicaragua, tne Philippine, Uruguay and Zaire.

During its tenth and eleventh sessions the Working Group met representatives of the i"oliowirg organizations or associations directly concerned by reports of enforced oi involuntary disappearances: Latin American Federation of Associations for Pelatives of Disappeared-Detamees (FEDEFAii); Grandmothers of the Plaza de Mayo (Argentina); Committee for Justice and Peace (Guatemala); Guatemalan Commission on Human Rights; Committee of Relatives of Detained, Disappeared, and Abducted Persons in Lebanon; Association of Relatives of hissing Uruguycuis. The Working Group also received /ritten information from these and from other oi"ganizaLions or associations directly concerned by reports of enforced зг involuntary Jisappearaices. In response to m invitation from the Latin American Feceration of Associations for Relatives of Disappeared-DeLamees (FEDHFAK), one member of the Group attended the Fourth Congress of FEDEFAM at Mexico City (13 to 19 November 1983) on the Group's behalf and reported on the Congress to the Group dt its twelfth session.

During the Commissior's discussicn of the Working Group's last report and in subsequent Tritten ctfLemenLs ana v.eei.ings ith the Working Group, organizations of relatives of disappeared persons, non-governmental organizations in consultative íLítus ana some Governments expressed criticism of certain aspects of tne Group's work. Disappointment was expressed that so few cases had been clarified and ic i'as ieLt thut the optimistic tone of the Group's last report was unrealistic. The relatives of the disappeared were increasingly frustrated; prior to coming i.o Lne Working Group rhey had alreauy carried out exhaustive and fruitless searches aa<i even in the face of all the evidence that it ?as humanly possible to produce, they пае received a otandardized answer from Governments that there was no record of their loved-one's detention. The Working Group received no nctcer answers irom the Governments but nevertheless gave positive value in iis report: to these unsatisfactory responses. On the pa^e 5 other h m d , the Iforl^ing Croup appeared to doubt the information provided by the relatives nnâ, in asking them tor nore informât < on, placed the juruen of investigation on the families rather than on the Government where it belonged. The report lac -ed a human di L-nsion; Lhe . ипечса oi relatives' tatements ha*' helped to ''alance the i_irst cwo reports but were massing from the third report. The '¡se of statistics also ^enae.'l to lehumrt.ize uhe pproach to disappearances.
It vas feared that the present trend vould lead to the institutionalization of the practice of disappearances. Tho Uorki.ig Group's proposal з n its last report not to take further acción on the cases from Mexico was especially criticized.
It '/as pointed out that the 73 cases •• ere eil documenceu, chat at i,>ost only one case had been clarified, that the relatives had not received the promised information from the Government uuc Liiat evidence existe" that che uisappeared persons were still alive. It was suggested that the investigations should be intensified; confidence in the Group's fairness a-id methods ,ал < t stake.

It was stressed that the need for the international community to deal effectively "ith the phenomenon of "^ i sapper ranees" 'as us urgent iio ' ^s . hen the Group had been established. The Working Group could help by taking action to discover where the hissing persons were ппа to prevent Luturo disappearances; such action would help restore confidence. It was suggested that the Working Group evaluate objectively the in,orm otion receive^ from Governments und iniorrn the Commission accordingly. In those cases where substantive co-operation was not forthcoming from the Government, it ' -is ,'jggested that Lhe Group's files oe. publicly transmitted to the Commission for appropriate follow-up, in accordance with other U'Hted Nations procedures. It "аь considered important for the Working Group to make specific recommendations to the Commission; three were suggested by one organisation: {<i) Enforced ^r involuntary disappearances should be declared a crime against humanity; (b) Impartial and exhaustive investigations should ue carneo out on the national Level anci those responsible punished; and (c) a major intez-national campaign against disappearances should be launched Sv the United .ations. More -ietai leu suggestions for actLon on the national level were received as well as for criteria to determine whether an investigation on the national L^vel vr Ls adequate (see chapter VII oelo\>) .

The Working Group studied with care the opinions regarding its work and the suggestions for improvemenr, ;>ru so r.e <*f tne results oi this considération are reflected in the introduction and in thf1 conclusions ana recommendations. lb. ¡'he forking Croup's previous rep'.-rts container expressions of concern uy non-governmental organizations, associations of relatives of missing persons and family members noout the safecy of persot'S activeLy engaged ni che search ror missing persons and in providing information on disappearances. This is a very real issue. The Working Group was greatly distressed to •earn of the death of the President of the El Salvador Commission on Human Rights, uarianeila Garcia Villas, cho had met the lording Croup on severo I occasions to provide información and transmit the concerns of relatives.
Persons missing as a recule or international r^ied conflict

In Lhe Group's lq83 report, reference "as made LO <., request thai, investigations should oe made into the fate of persons missing as a result of an international armed conflict.U ifte mai ter arose out of the conflict uetween 1/ l7/d .4/1982/14, paras. 118-120. page о the Islamic Republic oi Iran ,nu Ir^q. The Working Group's report providea information describing the role of the International Committee of the Red Cross in such circumstances, relating, as it «.'oes joth to combatants and to the civilian populations involveu, under the Third and Fourth Geneva conventions of 144 c>. Since then further requests tor assistance hnvt 1 een received j.rum an organiEation of families of those missing in the South Atlantic war in 1982 and some of the cases arising from recent events m Southern Lebanon .re similar. In both the latter situations the International Committee of the Red Cross has again been conducting its normal activities; certain governmental information has also been made available to relatives in Argentina.

In its last report the Group sought *uiuánce írom the Commisоiou on tne extent of its mandate in such situations. In June 1983, the Group received a renewed request and at its tenth session (June 1^83) it analysed the debate on its work which had occurred at the thirty-ninth session of the Commission on Human Rights. In particular it discussed the question of Lts involvement with victims of international armed conflicts in view of the existing jurisdiction of the International Committee of the Red Cross ^ICRC) in such cases, bince there was no express guidance from the Commission, the Working Group took the view that it was not within its competence under its present mandate to inquire into disappearances arising in such circumstances unless it was expressly directed to do so by the Commission. It noted the requests made for its assistance m tnree such situations and the material presented to it ^7ill remain in the files.
E/CW.4/1934/21
II. INSTANCES IN WHICH MORE THAN 20 REPORTS OF ENFORCED OR
INVOLJN'WY UibAPPLARANCES HAVE ¡¿ESN TRAnShlTTED
BY THE WORKING GROUP TO A GOVERNMENT
к. argentina Information reviewed and transmitted to tne Government 22c The Working Group provided i_he Conms°ion with information on enforced ot involuntary disappearances in Argentina in it? reports to the thirty-seventh, thirty-eighth and th]rtv-ninch sessions of the Commission on Human Rights.A' At the t-'ine of che extension of its' móndate, f"he Group had a large number of unanalysed reports -n l'^s files and «чпсе cien _ few reports have been received which refer to events m pt iox yea*"o. r u e ior'-mg Group's files still contain a small backJ og of unexamncd cases, During 193*3 the Wording Croup reviewed and tiansmitt_u to the Government '-he ijJec on I, 1 31 сг?&ез of reported disappearances. Vhth regard to a number ôt v. thor c?oes the iroup decided either to request fi_.t.i.her inform it loi t "oui the sources, or '.bat they aid not appear to fall wi'-nin che li-nits of LLs manaste.

The reports transmitted to the Govern nent contained for tlie mo&t part clear statements as to tne dat°, tiipe and ->аасе оГ the missing person's arrest, the authorities responsible and statements c~ indications that the arrest t/as witnessed In some сагеь, г 1 though few or no details were provided on the actual arrest, other elements сГ jnvebU^t-'on Ï ere rasae available, such as infornation that official sca_~cnes for the aiissing person hao been carried out in close connection vrit\ the (¡Пи^ос^апсе ^r tha^ the person nad been seen m custody. Most oi the mi&b^ng persons were lepoitcd to have been arrested at home, at cheir place c£ ' ^r'c o nt crecií^ec1 public locations. It vas variously reported that the ^е^яогз ma» n g the arrest wore ir.-litary uniforms, identified themselves is meiibc^s of the recuri^y forces, useti military or police vehicles and had occupied the neignbuu^nood or place vzlierc the arrest took place for a period of time; in ьоше СсЗ^ь che regular рс' ;се reportedlv refused to intervene .zJ m папу сагоч it на^ L 1 JO Î eportv. i cLut the missing person had been seen m e clrnde&ti ,e detention cfntrp In almost a]] cases habeas corpus petit'onc an-1 apperls со governmeut authorities ,/ert ^epor^edly mads; jn some, criminal complaints for unlawful detent ion vjere -eporLed.
I/ JS/CN
1.4/1425, priias. ¿7-/8 and annexe IX-XIT; Ь/и<.4/1'-92, paras. 33-52 a^d ^ПЛРХСС CV-VTJ- V/CJ> T '+/ L9S3/J4, J d r a % / ?-3?.
2/ The forces most oT'ei. i ported as rasponsi ble for n e arrest are the local police, the fedeaj. oolice. _лз security jcces, -he arniy} the navy, "commando antisubvtT s 1' vo", milirary com^ineu Гэгсв^ \ fuerzas conjuntas), State Intelligence ^ci^ic:, ¿rl t-c cer. 'f '£^2- „UL'^fL^ ni 11^^.ry pclire or the Federal Police Co-o-dimtjor ' ureau (Coo^'mccion Feoeral).

Included in the 1,131 reports mentioned move ,iere the disappearances of Ц- children after their arrest with their parents or other family members. Also among the 1,131 reports we^e requests for information received from relatives regarding the children due to have been born to 25 women who were said to have been pregnant when they disappeared. In that connection the Working Group sent reports to the Government from persons who stated that they had been held in clandestine detention centres (see below, para. 26) with some of the pregnant women; those reports gave details on the treatment of the women, the medical assistance they received and the persons responsible for the children after their birth.

Since its estaolishment the Working Group has transmitted to the Government of Argentina 2,508 reports of enforced or involuntary disappearances; the characteristics of those reports are substPntially the same as the description given above. The years in which those disappearances reportedly occurred were: 19 71; 2 cases; 1974; 5 cases; 1975; 76 cases; 197b: 1,144 cases;
1977: 946 cases; 1978; 254 cases: 1979: 36 cases; 1980; 29 cases and 1981: 3 cases.

In addition to the reports from relatives on disappearances transmitted to the Government of Argentina in 1983, the Working Group sent copies of eight statements by persons who reported that they nad oeen secretly held in some of the clandestine detention centres in Argentina referred to in previous reports and in six centres not previously reported, ds we LI ,¡s in police stations and official prisons. These statements referred to some of the missing persons whose cases had been sent to the Government, and the Group hoped that the details contained in those statements would assist the investigation. The information contained in these eight statements is substantially the same as that described in the Group's report to the Commission at its thirty-seventh session regarding the sources of the statements on clandestine detention centres, the characteristics and locations of the centres, the personnel responsible for their operation and the eventual fate of the detaineees.„' To date a total of 54 such reports relating to some 51 detention centres have been transmitted to the Government of Argentina and the list of persons held in these centres, as reported by iormer detainees, now contains more than 2,lb5 entries.

During 1983 the Working Group received a written statement from a former Argentine Federal Police Inspector who reported working in the office of the Minister of the Interior from April 1976 to January 1977- At its eleventh session the Working Group was able to question him on his statement in which he provided information on the arrest of persons by the security authorities, clandestine detention centres, disappearances, missing children and co-operation with the security services of other countries; there is general, but not complete, agreement between his report jnü those presented oy former detainees.
3/ Ë/CN.4/1435, paras. 56-62.
Information and viei7s received from relatives of missing persons and their organizations Reappearance ot missing children

Che forking Group has always given particular attention to the search ю г disappeared children, both those irho disappeared when their parents were arrested and those reportedly oorn in clandestine detention centres. In its first two reports the Working Group provided information on five missing children whose whereabouts had ^een discovered, principally as a result of searches by their grandparents: (a) Two children arrested with their parents in Buenos Aires in Sept^maer 1976, ;ere ultimately founu in 1979 in Chile - they had heen abandoned in Chile in late 1976 and placed for adoption with a foster family; the grandparents are now m touch with the children; (b) tuo other children (a boy of five months and a girl four years old) disappeared upon the arrest of their parents in buenos Aires in October 1977; they ere located by the grandparents in March 1980 when proceedings uere under way for their adoption; (c) the fifth chii'i, according to reports in the forking Group's files, was born in a clandestine detention centre to a mother who was three months pregnant \ Then she was arrested; the mother, -¿ccempamed by security agents, handed the child to its maternal grandmother - the mother is still missing.

In 1983 the Working Group received written information anci met representatives of the Grandmothers of the Plaza de Maye who reported the discovery of a farther nine children:
Case A. A six-month-'•old girl disappeareu with lier mother m October i97b in Buenos Aires. Relatives requested information from the authorities ana the case '/as transmitted to the Government by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. In late 1982 the Grandmothers discovered the chili* who had been placed with adoptive parents and the child's grandmother is now in contact with her.
Case B. Two children (a boy three years old and nis sister a,ged eignt
months) disappeared with their mother after her home in the province of buenos Aires Province was raided in May 1977. The case vas transmitted to the Government by the Working Group in lc)82. The Grandmothers found the children in 1983 in the care of a large family with limited resources who had given shelter to both children. The mother is still missing.
Case f\ A male cnild was born during his mother's detention. The mother, four months pregnant, disappeared in October 1977 after her nome in J.ar del Plata had been raided. The case was transmitted to the Government in 1981 by the Working Group. The Grandmothers found the child in 1982; he had been given to a relative shortly after his birth together with a letter from his mother, who is still missing.
.4/1984/21 Case D. A rour-year-ola boy disappeared with his mother jn June 1Л78 in Buenos Aires. In 1983 a juvenile court judge informed the paternal grandmother that m I978 he had given custody of the child - who had been left by an unknown person with the maternal granünother - to the maternal grandmother's family. fne judge had been informed since 1978 of the search for the child oy the paternal grandmother. The Court, ho( ever, ¿ave n o information со either side of the family. Che mother is still missing.
Case E, A one-and-a-haif-vear-old ^irl disappeared when tne woman who was taking care Л her was arrested (the girl's mother was in ргзson)„ The child was lefr ith a poor family who hao witnessed the arrest; the police refused to accept custody of the child and threatened the ramily witn oeing mad Q to disappear if they insisted. The family fled and in 1983 - after a publicity campaign b/ the Grandmothers - л person mtormea them of the whereabouts Of the missing girl; that person was subsequently attacked and spent a considerable time in the hospital. The district juvenile court judge had known of the child's correct
Identity, che whereabouts of the nother and the search jy the Grandmothers, but had taken no action. The girl has now Deen
reunited ith ner mother.
Case F. A one-year-old boy disappeared with his mother in August 1977 in Buenos Aires. The persons who arrested the mother Had given the child to a neighbour. The juvenile court judge gave custody of the boy "o a family which was not materially or morally bUitable; the neighbours subsequently reported the ill-treatment of the child to the police. lu 1У82 the case was transmit Led to the Government by the Wording Group. In 1983 a photograph of the child, publíjhe i by the Grandmothers, was recognized and they were informed of the child's whereabouts. The juvenile court judge, when requested ^y the Grandmothers to return the child to the family, ordered a psychological examination of tne child's grandmother. The child has jeen returneu to his lamily; the mother is still missing.

The Grandmothers of the Plaza ue îlayo explained to the Wording Group the methods of work they had used in searching for the missing children; they have repeatedly visited government ministries, courts, hospitals, ctuthorities in charge of adoption and the registration of births, and orphanages. A publicity campaign T?ith pictures of .he nissinq; children was carried out and as a result increasing support from the general population has been gained. They have not had the help of the authorities, executive or judicial, m their searches ana they have been the subject of repeated threats and acts of intimidation. The Grandmothers emphasized that when a rhild was found, his or her best interests determined the steps to be taken subsequently. The Grandmothers still had some 130 missing children not vet accounted lor; they requested the JorKing Group to assist them in finding the remaining children by:
(a) Obtaining from the Government a list of all births which were registered after Lie lapse of the normal registration period during the years 1976-1983; thib would help find children born in clandestine detention centres;
(b) Obtaining from the Government a list of adoptions for the period Ь 76-1 .83.
(c) Requesting that those children wnose births in clandestine detention centres were attested to by writcen statements be returned to their families; aad
(d) Providing the Grandmothers из сh the information m the Working Group's files regarding births in clandestine detention centres.

The Grandmothers report that in 19вЗ they oresonted several petitions of habeas corpus to the courts on behalf of children born in .detention. These petitions contained signed statements by witnesses to the arrest of the pregnant mother, as ^ell as statements by persons detained with her which provide information on the nirth of the chl~*d, the raeuica 1 doctors involved and on the officers responsible for the detention centre. The Grandmothers asked the courts to take a number of specific investigatory steps to find the mothers, and children, including talcing testimony from che medical doctors involved and from those responsible for the detention centres.
Reappearance of disappeared detainees

An organization of relatives of missing detainees provided the Working Group with a report on tne lelease of persons who had been missing for a number of years; two of these persons reported that some prisoners uere still being held at the clandestine detention centre from which they had been released late in 1982. The organization ashed that the uetaiis De .cept confidential to respect the requests of those concerned who were fearful of reprisals. Some of the names given vere not on the list of missing persone, but in one instance the Working Group had transmitted the case to the Government.
Identification of bodies 33» The Working Group also received detailed information trom an organization of relatives of missing persons on the identification of previously unidentified bodies in a cemetery in Argentina. As л result of the judicial investigation, 76 bodies w¿re identified, 20 of which had appeared on lists of disappeared detainees published Ny numan rights organisations. The Working Group transmitted one of the cases to the Government in 1981 and che Group's files indicate that three of the 76 had ueen seen aj ,ive in a Clandestine detention centre and that four others had arrived dead at that centre. In addition, some relatives of missing persons have written to the Working Group to inform it or the identification of bodies as those of their mssing relatives.
''Final document on the struggle against subveision and terrorism''

Since the extension of the Group'? mandate, relatives and their organizations have repeatedly expressed deep concert, at the failure of the authorities to undertake effective investigations; they expressed fear that recent decisions of the military Government indicated that it did not intend to carry out investigations or would make them impossible. Reference was made to a paper entitled "Final document on the struggle against subversion and terrorism", published by the military Government in April 1983, which, according to the relatives, asserted that the disappeared persons should be considered dead. The relatives drew attention to four points v;hich indicated that the missing persons had been arrested by government agents and not killed in clashes: first, thousands of persons had seen the missing persons arrested at home, at work or in public places; second, released detainees who had been held in clandestine detention centres with missing persons had made statements to that effect; third, the recognition in the final document that the armed forces might on occasion have exceeded the limits of respect for human rights; and, fourth, the numerous bodies of missing persons found in the cemeteries could only have been buried there by officials.
Amnesty Law of September 1983

Relatives' organizations also referred to an amnesty law promulgated on 23 September 1983 by the military Government which the relatives stated would effectively prevent investigations into the ^-hereabouts of missing persons. The act abolishes penal measures for all criminal acts committed in order to combat terrorism or subversion in the period 25 May 1973 to 14 June 1982. It would also prevent persons from being questioned, investigated, or summoned to appear in court or before any other body in regard to such acts, and further provides that no civil action can be brought in such cases. This law would prevent answers being obtained to such questions as; Who was arrested? by whom? Where were they taken? What happened to them? The relatives' organizations point out. that the amnesty law is incompatible with General Assembly resolution 33/173 which called for Governments "to ensure that law enforcement and security authorities or organizations are fully accountable, especially in lav/, in the discharge of their duties, such accountability to include legal responsibility for unjustifiable excesses which might lead to enforced or involuntary disappearances and to other violations of human rights". Reference was also made to resolution 15 (XXXIV) adopted by the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities of 10 September 1981, which urged that States in which persons had been reported to have disappeared should "repeal or refrain from adopting laws which could impede inquiries concerning such disappearances". The Group has been informed that in several cases of abduction, judges, in two instances from courts of appeal, have refused to apply the law on the grounds that it is "irremediably null and void" or "invalid".

The organizations of relatives have also made specific requests for improvements in the international community's and the Group's action regarding missing persons. They requested in particular that the United Nations and the Working Group adopt a resolution similar to that of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights of the Organization of American States, which declares that it is the responsibility of the Argentine Government to adopt the necessary measures to clarify and resolve the problem of missing persons. They also requested more resolute and effective action with a view to finding alive the missing detainees who have spent years of inhuman suffering in illegal and secret prisons.

Since its mandate was extended, the Working Group has received written information from the Government (note verbale dated J4 June 1983, and letters dated 27 September 1983 and 18 November 1983) and met representatives of the Government at its tenth and eleventh sessions. The Government stated that it was aware of the effort made by the Working Group to analyse and deal with the communications transmitted tínd stated it would study those cases thoroughly. It also pointed out that the lack, of fresh allegations of enforced or involuntary disappearaces, save for isolated recent cases that had been rapidly cleared up, indicated that the phenomenon had ended and chat the situation had returned to normal.

The Government provided the Working Group with a copy of the document entitled "Final document on the struggle against subversion and terrorism" and commented on its nature; it pointed out rhat the document uas intended to shea light on a situation which had affected the country for a number of years. It was not, however, intended to deal with individual cases; it was for public distribution and the Government continued to believe firmly that, both internally and externally, the information available on individual cases should be given only to the relatives requesting it. The Government's document was not, as it had been claimed, an attempt by the armed forces to evade responsibility for actions undertaken in combating terrorism: on the contrary, it was evident from many passages in the text, that the armed forces accepted their share of the responsibility for any mistakes they might have made in the actions that had led to the defeat of the subversive guerilla movement. The document should not be interpreted as an official declaration of the presumed death of all the persons reported to ha^e disappeared. Such an interpretation had been given to a sentence of the document which read that "those who appear in lists of disappeared persons and who are not in exile or underground are considered dead for legal and administrative purposes". The representative of the Government explained that that sentence was simply informative, and was not a juridical decision applicable to individual cases; the Military Junta had not sought, by means of the document, to derogate from the legal provisions in force under which a judicial decision was required before a person could be declared missing and presumed dead.

The Government also estimated the alleged disappearances at 6,000 and stated that the figures of 15,000, 30,000 and even more had been exaggerated by various politically motivated organizations. The figures given in the "Final document on the struggle against subversion and terrorism" of 21,642 terrorist incidents between 1965 and L979 and 742 clashes between 1973 and 1979, in which members of the security forces were also killed, suggested that the unsolved cases involved persons who had died in armed clashes, or whose bodies had been found on the streets, ana could not be identified; they were therefore buried as NN (unidentified bodies). The representative of the Government stated that the question of unidentified bodies or NN graves had been under careful examination by the judicial authorities, which had so far been una¡>le to estaolish the truth of allegations that persons whose identity was known had been secretly buried in the country. That proved how easy it was to launch campaigns concerning events which played upon the emotions of the general public. i. 4/1984/21

concerní rip missing children, the representative or the Government reported that the hypothesis advanced by the Government to the Working Group that the cause of disappearance of minors might be that the children vero ^ith relatives who, for various reasons were keeping the fact a secret, would appear to be confirmed by reports concerning the reappearance of various children v¿ho had remained in the keeping of relatives or friends of their families. In the case of children due to have been born to women /ho were reportedly pregnant at the time of their disappearance, the representative of the Government informed the Group of the difficulties encounterea in carrying out investigations, pointing out that the pregnancy itself was an unproven assumption. He added that the location of the mother, ипо had reportedly disappeared, vas ultimately the oasic prerequisite for shedding light on the allegation. With regard to the statements made by persons uho claimed to havp first-hand knowledge of situations, places and persons and alleged that official agencies had committed offences, the representative of the Government said that the authorities had repeatedly pointed out the political motives underlying such claims and the lack of credibility of their authors; the statements made m relation to xeported births in captivity followed the classic pattern of alleged coincidence of persons and places and interwoven accounts attempting to show that one story was corroborated by another.

The representative of the Government stated that, since terrorism had oeen defeated, the problem of disappeared persons had ceased to exist in his country end that also facilitated investigations by magistrates, ^ho had previously been hanpered by pressure and threats from subversive groups. He also stated that 1983 vas i year of vital importance for his country, as it represented the closing of a political era which had begun when violence was at its height and would end uith the return to institutional normality, v/hich voula take place when the national authorities elected on 30 October 1983 assumed office. he stated that che nev Government, which woulu take office as a result of those elections, might wish to provide the Working Group or the Commission with information or views on that matter.

In a letter dated 18 wovemuer 1983 the Government of Argentina informed the Working Group that Act Fo. 22.068/79, which had reduced the period required for the presumption of death from three years to 90 days, had oeen abrogated. The Government further reported that a new lav had been enacted, which established that the Executive would provide compensation for all damages suffered as a consequence of offences covered by the Amnesty Law of September 1983.

¡be following is a statistical summary of the reports of enforced or involuntary disappearances n Argentina dealt uith .iy rhe Working Group since it was established:
I. Cases transmitted to the Government by the Working Group (see para. 25 above) 2,508
II. Responses received from the Government ¿elating to cases transmitted by the Working Group • 0
III. Case., clarified by information irom non-
governmental sources 4/ 17

The Working Group noted that the installation of Lhc пег; President of Argentina, following the 'October 1983 elections, was scheduled to take place on the clay following the end of its twelfth session and the adoption of its report. It seemed inappropriate to speculate on the action to be taken by the new Government in relation to the cases of disappearances; instead, the l/orking Group hoped to issue an addendum to its report with any new information. In this context, the IJorKing Group's riles contai a a large volume of information on which investigations by the Argentine authorities could be based ana the Group stands ready to tra. smit ^ny of that information to the Government of Argentina if it so wishes. The requests of the Grandmothers contained in paragraph 30 above, appear to :>e worth pursuing, and at the present stage it is suggesteo that they should be directly explored by the family members with the ne\j Government.
4/ Persons released from detention: 7 Persons at liberty: 2 Children found: 3 Persons whose aeath has been officially recorded: 5.
В. Bolivia
Information reviewed and transmitted to the Government

The Working Group provided information on enrorced or involuntary disappearances in Bolivia in its reports Lo the Commission at its thirty-seventh, thirty-eighth and thirty-ninth sessions.2.' The Working Group has transmitted reports on the allégea disappearance of 32 persons to the Government of Bolivia and has requested information thereon. The missing persons, who are mainly students, workers, trade unionists or teachers, were reportedly arrested under previous Governments between July 1980 and August 1981. Most were reporteûly arrested in the city of La Paz, at cheir home, on the street or at unspecified places in named towns or cities. Security forces, the army or para-military groups viere allegedly responsible. The Working Group received information from the Government and non-governmental sources clarifying 13 of the cases: 5 persons had been released, 6 were at liberty and the death of 2 had been officially recorded. The Working Group was also informed of the establishment in October 1982 of a National commission for the Investigation of Disappeared Persons.

At a meeting -,7Îth a representative of a non-governmental organization of relatives of missing persons, the Working Group received information on the progress made by the National Commission for the Investigation of Disappeared Persons including its work plan for the one year period beginning on 1 February 1983. The details are contained below m chapter VII.
Information and views received from the Government of Bolivia

Since the extension of its mandate, the Working Group has maintained contact with the Government of Bolivia and met a representative of the Government during its eleventh session. He assured the Group of his Government's commitment to respect hurian rights ana its respect for and appreciation of the work done by the Group. He stated that, despite the problems facing the Government, there was a genuine and sincere desire to clarify all cases of enforced or involuntary disappearances. The representative emphasized the fact that his Government was not responsible for the disappearances that haa occurred during previous governments but that none the less it wanted to clarify all cases. That was why the Government had established the National Commission for the Investigation of Disappeared Persons in 1982.2/ The Commission has carried out its work with some success, but its main problem has been the identification of the corpses of victims. He stated that 14 corpses had been found in a cemetery in La Paz, out since there were no papers, identification was difficult; the persons responsible for those violations had taken steps to erase traces. Finally, the representative told the Group that his Government would send it all the information as it became available.
5/ E/CN.4/1435, para. i64; E/CN.4/1492, paras, 53-57; ana E/CN.4/1983/14, paras. 38-42.
6/ E/CN.4/1983/14, para. 40.

The following is a statistical summary of the reports of enforced or involuntary disappearances m Bolivia <!ealt with ->y the working Group since it was established:
I. Oases transmitted to the Government oy tnc Working Group (see para, 45 above) 32
II. Government responses
(a) total responses received from the
Government relating to cases transn¡itted by the > orkinp Group -see para. 45 above) 10 '(b) Cases clarified by the Government's
responsesZ' У
III. Cases clarified by information from non-governmental sources^' 4
7/ Persons released from detention: 2 Persons at liberty: 5 Persons uhose deaths have been officially recorded: 2.
In one report the Government stated that the person had not been arrested, 8/ Persons released trom detention: 3 Persons at liberty: 1. page IS

The Working Group dealt x^ith enforced or involuntary disappearances in Cyprus in its first three reports.j?/ The Group transmitted information on cases of enforced or involuntary disappearances received from the Government of Cyprus, the Pancyprian Committee of Parents and xielatives of Undeclared Prisoners and Missing Persons and other organizations to the Government of Turkey and the authorities of the Turkisn Cypriot Community. The Group also transmitted information received from the Turkish Cypriot Community on enforced or involuntary disappearances to the Government of Cyprus. The number of reported disappearances from both sides amounts to about 2,400.

At the Working Group's eighth session, in September 1982, it requested its Chairman to address a letter to the Chairman of the Committee on Missing Persons in Cyprus. In that letter the Group stated that Lt had formed the view that the Committee on Missing Persons provided not only adequate but also appropriate machinery for resolving the outstanding cases of disappearances from both communities. Moreover, the Group said that the Committee'st purely humanitarian aims exactly coincided with its own mandate. The Group vas therefore convinced that its role should not be to supplant the Committee on Missing Persons, but rather to give it all the assistance within its power. Thus, the Group said, as a practical suggestion, that it would be willing to send one or more members to join the Chairman of the Committee and its two other members either in Geneva or Nicosia, in order to discuss possible methods of making further progress on the problem. The Group expressed the hope that, if the Chairman of the Committee thought the suggestion helpful he would communicate it to the two other members.

At its tenth session in June 1983, the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances had before it General Assembly resolution 37/181 adopted on 17 December 1982. In that resolution the Assembly invited the Working Group to follow developments and to recommend to the parties concerned ways and means of overcoming the pending procedural difiiculties of the Committee on Missing Persons in Cyprus and, in co-operation with the Committee, to facilitate the effective implementation of its investigative work on the basis of the existing relevant agreements. The Working Group notes with satisfaction both that the members of the Committee have been making renewed efforts to overcome the remaining procedural differences and that the Secretary-General and his representatives are assisting in that endeavour. The Working Group's position, therefore., is to remain available to assist the Committee as appropriate.
_9/ E/CN.4/i435, paras. 79-83; E/Crt.4/1492, paras. 65-66; E/CN.4/1983/14, paras. 43-46.
D. El Salvador
Information reviewed and transmitted to the Government

The Working Group's previous activities in relation to El Salvador appear in its three earlier reports.i_2/ Since 'the adoption of its latest report, the Working Group has continued to receive and examine information relating tt> enforced or involuntary disappearances in El Salvador. During that period the Group transmitted to the Government 540 reports of enforced or involuntary disappearances in El Salvador (38 reportedly occurred m 1981, ±19 in 1982 and 383 in 1983), together with its request for information. All these cases were transmitted in accordance with the urgent action procedure. The Group also contacted the Government regarding cases transmitted in the past, in particular when new information on the missing person's whereabouts became available. With regard to other cases, which were not transmitted to the Government, the Working Group sought' further details frotn the source or decided that the case did not appear to fall Within the terms of its mandate.

The reports of disappearances transmitted to the Government were submitted by the relatives of the persons alleged to be missing by Salvadorian human rights organizations acting on behalf of the relatives and by a non-governmental organization in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council.

In the cases transmitted to the Government information was provided on the identity of the persons reported missing (first names and family names), the date and the exact location of the arrest (most reports also indicated the time). In many instances the age and the occupation of the missing person were given; the most frequently reported occupations were student, worker (skilled and unskilled), and farmer (campesino). Most of the arrests reportedly took place at the missing person's home or at a specified public place, such as a market or bus station. Other persons were reportedly arrested at their place qf work. Most of the disappearances during the year have allegedly taken place in the cities and particularly in the capital San Salvador. Each of the reports transmitted to the Government contained information about the persons responsible for the arrest. Among the forces cited were the army, national guard, national police, treasury police (Policía de Hacienda) combined forces or security forces. Many cases indicate that the persons responsible for the arrest were armed and dressed in civilian clothes. Information was also provided about the vehicles used in the arrests. In some cases official vehicles were used, in others the licence plate number of the vehicle was provided, and in still others the vehicles had no licence plates. In most of the cases it was reported that habeas corpus petitions and visits to the offices of the security services had Ъееп fruitless. jLO/ E/CN',4/1435, paras. 84-101 and annex XIII; E/CN.4/1435/Add. 1, para. , 6; E/CN.4/1492, paras. 67-87 and annexes IX-XI; E/CN.4/1492/Add.1, paras. 11, 12 and 19; E/CN.4/1983/14, paras. 47-56.

Since the Working Group was established it has transmitted 1^782 reports of enforced or involuntary disappearances to the Government of El Salvador as is indicated in the table at the end of this section. The years in which those disppearances reportedly occurred were: 1971, one case; 1977, one case; 1979, 65 cases; 1980, 431 cases; 1981, 320 cases; 1982, 581 cases; and 1983, 383 cases.
Information and views received from organizations representing relatives of missing persons.

The Working Group in a meeting with a representative of a non-governmental organization of relatives of missing persons was informed of that organization's concern regarding disappearances in El Salvador. The representative stated that the practice of enforced or involuntary disappearances continued unchanged in that country, that serious investigations have not been undertaken and that pasL cases continued unresolved. It was stated that the most important initiative to deal with the problem of enforced or involuntary disappearances in LI Salvador had been the creation of the Special Commission for the Investigation of Political Prisoners and Disappearances, but that that Commission had dissolved itself on 3 January 1980 due to lack of co-operation from the authorities. The representative also noted that the Salvadorian Government vas supposedly co-operating with the Working Group on many cases, but that in reality it was merely submitting information uhich was already available. Finally, the representative stated that the Commission on Human Rights created by the Government of El Salvador had not made any progress to date in working for the disappeared,

Since the adoption of the Working Group's latest report, it has received information in writing from the Government of El Salvador. Some of that information was presented to the Commission on Human Rights at its thirty-ninth session by the Working Group's Chairman in his statement introducing the Working Group's report» At its tenth session the Working Group met a representative ôf the Government of El Salvador in New York and at its eleventh session it met the Permanent Representative of El Salvador to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

The representatives of El Salvador categorically denied that their Government practised or tolerated enforced or involuntary disappearances and reaffirmed their Government's commitment to full respect for human rights. The Working Group was informed that the International Committee of the Red Cross was continuing its tracing activities in El Salvador and that the Government had undertaken to inform that organization systematically of all arrests. Further, a control commission had been set up by the armed forces to deal with any abuses, and teaching courses and conferences were organized to instruct the military on humanitarian law and the protection of prisoners.

The representatives of the Government of El Salvador placed the problem of enforced or involuntary disappearances within the context of the difficult situation in their country. They informed the Group of the Government's erfo-L' ю rstdLliín Leraúi.i4t ' Lbr^ugb r^foi^ns, ano pcinUa ou» L -.L Г H JW constitution "7аь lemg prepcTM, an J that elections roula be held m L\L near ru'ure. Tber-> he 5', b^ jn a ^ C T P . S C JU Lhe viob ticrá oí huilón .. _£ *~ ь 1 Л -^eír с ou at "-"у did tic Go\ \iiic ic's cnicein IOL ht, pioCectiun of hum^a iiyi э /as demonstrated by the establishment of a g ove rumen i_ a 1 Human l^ght^ Сошгпъ&.оп, rhich as totally independe it 1 rom the. judicial and с/е^чг^/^ :> Taic'it.s of the Go " re Time'it, and ha< ьгерагеи tnt Amnesty Lav wricl \ is .jr^WL^.ei ^ 198-1. fhe Солги ssion had broad powers i ith access о ail detention ni'u 1'^ i г .he country, and co-bid take up s p e c i e савеь aid o.<rca ir^ose m whxch a b__h^^^ < c^pus uetLtion bad producer i n^gatr e rcouit Che governnem r^p^esjiri. с»-iv/еь also eïuplan eJ the habeas corpus procedure \.n El balvacor (0 In letteis daf.5Q 3 December iQ8?, il January \9¿ó + ?еЬгаггу 1983, 11 February 198 •>, 7 Ji'no J98j, о July 1983, 11 July U & 3 , 1 Au¿»-s_ 1935 I? btptember 1983, Ю October 1983, 21 October ,93i3 7 Uovetrbc- 1° ^ .nd т ^aole aated 1 August 1983 the Governnent of Ы Salvador tr^n (T'LL°Û ni o_tnv. t1 on oa Ceses of enforced or involuntary disappearances со the 'o^kink, Gro p Further, ûy a note verbale dated 7 June 1983, the Government trfnsraiLted ^ list containing the names of persons v'ho had oeen released as a result of the Amnesty Law, because some of those names might have been m the WoiK^g >oup's files as missing persons. In fact, 54 vere in the vJorking Group's filej n u.issmg persons and had been Drought to the attention of the Gov^rnneni. S rxe Lhe Working Group /as established . t has received replies from '-(г* G^vaiw ent cf El Salvador relating to 264 cases oí enforced or involuntary «i^apr з<-чгп~е'з it has transmitted to the Government; tne replies received conta.,ri t ^e «.oí 1<Л irg information: persons arrested and in prison; 119: person? refused fii i detent LO : c l ; persons «,/hose deaths iave oeen officially recorcVo 2; cpj 52 cases on v^hich there are no records of detention,

The following is a sta'istical summary of the îeporto ci er^orcrd or involuntary disappearances in Ei Salvador dealt with b} uuj ^or^n" Srou^ since it was established;
I. Cases trrn^m.tted to the Gotfernme'i*. by Lh^ Working Group (see para. 55 above) i,i?
II. Gcvernmert
(a) Total responses received frim th° Jovernr°r relating to cases transmitted Ъ-у the
Group í'see para. cO above)
(b) Cases clan tied by the Government's re&ponsusj_i.' JL/ Persons acrostet end m prison. 11 Persons released from detention: ()i Persons 'Ьоье eatns ha^e been ofiiCi.alIy recordé
Ее Guatemala
Information reviewed and transmitted to the Government

The Working Group's previous activities in relation to Guatemala appear in its thiee earlier reports ..±~/ Since the extension of the Working Group's mandate it has reviewed and transmitted to the Government information on 332 enforced or involuntary disappearances reported to have occurred in Guatemala together with its request for information; 13 of these reports were transmitted in accordance with the urgent action procedure. With regard to other reports not transmitted to the Government, the Group decided to request further information from the source or found that the report did not appear to fall within its mandate.

Since the extension of its mandate, the Working Group has continued to receive reports of enloiced o'- involuntary disappearances in Guatemala. The reports were submitted by relatives o f missing persons, by organizations acting on behalf of the relatives and by a non-governmental organization in consultative status with Lhc Economic and social Council. The reports transmitted to the Government contained information about the identity of the missing person (first panes ana family names), the date and location of the arrest (some reporto also indicated the time). Eighty-nine of the disappearances reportedly occurred in 1982 and 243 in 1983; the 1983 monthly breakdown is: January, 33, cises; February, 12; tiarch, 8; April, 7; way, 12;
June, 47; July. 29; August. 16; September, 50; October, 27; November, 2. The most frequently reported piece of arrest was a town, the home of the missing person, or J rpecific public place. Some reports also concern tov/nspeople who were arrested together when Government security forces occupied their towns. Most arrests were carried out oy armed men in civilian clothes, by solidiers in civilian clothes, or by security forces. The age and occupation of the reported missing perçons ,'ere given зп some cases; the most frequently reported occupations were farmer (campesino), teacher, professor, student and social worker. ^eventy-six of the repo ts transmitted to the Government concerned women and a number of the reports concerned minors. The information concerning Guatemala is not as detriled or precise as that made available with regard to some other countsiec, because it is claimed that there are difficulties in getting the information ou*" of the country.

Since the Working Group was established it has transmitted 1,382 reports of enforced or involuntary disappearances to the Government of Guatemala as is indicated in the table at the end of this section.
V2_l E/CN.4/3435, paras. 107-116 and annex XIV; E/CN.4/1492, paras. 91-102 and annexes XII-XIIT; E/CN.4/1492/Add.1, para. 19; E/CN.4/1983/14, paras. 57-63.
E/CN.4/1*84/21
Information and views recciveJ i'rom organizations representing relatives of missing persons

During the current period of ito mandate the jorking Group received both oral and written information ano virus concerning enforcea or involuntary disappearances in Guatemala from urbanizations working an behali of relatives of missing persons. During its tenth and eleventh sessions representatives of Guatemalan human rights organizations met the l.orking Group. They stated that the problem of disappearances in Guatemala was closely connected with the counter-insurgency operations carried out by tne Government. In the past, disappearances in the countryside had occurred mostly in the departments of Quiche and Huehuetenango. whereas the Jepartment of San aarcos was currently the most affected; disappe^rances also continued in the cities. All sectors of Guatemalan society, without exception, were touched by disappearances, particularly farmers, workers, labour lawyers, trade unionists, university professors and -students. Disappearances m Guatemala could not oe attributed to persons fleeing their villages for the mountains; people abandoned their villages collectively while most disappearances occurred individually. Furthermore, disappearances also took place in cities and reports of the arrest and disappearance of groups of persons were relatively few. The persons, dressed in civilian clothes, who arrested people who then disappeared, could be identified as members of the security forces оу their weapons, the vehicles they used and the way in which they carried out their operations. Information, obtained from former detainees, was also provided on places where missing persons were held, mainly the military base in Peten and the military base in Huehuetenango.
Information received from the Government of Guatemala

Since the extension of its mandate the forking Group has received information from the Government of Guatemala concerning eight cases transmitted to it by the Group. According to this information, five of the persons were sentenced to prison terms (in one case the sentence was suspended) and the other three nad not been arrested.

The question of enforced or involuntary disappearances in Guatemala is a concern of the Special Rapporteur on human rights in that country and reference should t>e made to the relevant passage m his report to the Commission on Kuman Rights.il/ 13/ E/CN.4/1984/30,

The following ic a stackstical summary of the reports of enforced or involuntary disappearances in Guatemala dealt with by the Working Group since it was established:
I. Cases transmitted to the Government by the Working Group (see paras. 63-64 above) 1,382
II- Governmei t responses (a"> Total responses received from the
Government relating to cases transmitted by th3 Working Group (see para. 66 above) 12 (b) Ca.^es clarified by the Government's
resyonc^s.tZ 9
III. Cases clarifiée1 by information from non-^cverairenlal sourcesAr!/ 8
14/ person; in prison; 4 Person*"1 <iL liberty: 4 Perrons with suspended sentence: 1.
With regard :o three cases the Government reported that there were no records of arresú, 15/ Persons released; 7 Persons whose death v?as officially recorded: 1.
F. Honduras
Information reviewed and transmitted to the Government

The Working Group provided information on enforced or involuntary disappearances in Honduras in its reports to the Commission at its thirty-eighth and thirty-ninth sessions.JL°/ Since the extension of its mandate the Working Group has transmitted reports on three disappearances as urgent actions; two reportedly occurred in harch 1983 and one in hay 1983. These reports contained details on the identity of the missing person, the date, place and, in one case, the time of the arrest, dad some information on those reportedly responsible. Also during 1983 the Working Group transmitted to the Government a complete file on all the unclarified cases sent to the Government since 1980, with the request that it be informed of any results of investigations; these cases included the reports of the disappearance of four foreign nationals in Honduras in 1981.

Prior to the latest extension of its mandate the Working Group had transmitted reports on 66 disappearances to the Government; nine of those cases have been clarified, two by information provided bv the Government and seven by information provided by other sources. Fifty of the reported disappearances occurred in 1981 and 16 in 1982» The reports contained details about the identity of the missing persons (first names and family names), the date and location of the arrest (most reports also indicated the time) and some details about the persons responsible for the arrest. In some cases the age and profescion or activity of the missing person was indicated and the presence of witnesses was reported. Sometimes the location of the arrest was given as the place of work, a military barracks or places in the street, but in most only the town or city in which the arrest took place was indicated. The reports stated that the missing person had been arrested by the National Directorate of Investigations (D.N.I. - Directorio Nacional de Investigaciones), the Treasury Police or by security forces» The Government informed the Working Group that two of the persons had been released and the release of seven others was reported by non-governmental organizations.
Information and views received from organizations representing relatives of missing persons

During the Working Group's tenth session a representative of a non-governmental organization of relatives of missing detainees expressed his organization's concern over the disappearances in Honduras. rie said that a Committee of Relatives of Disappeared Detainees had been established in Honduras and had prepared lists of persons who disappeared in Honduras. It was requested that the Government, in addition to the general assurances of good will it had given, be asked to carry out a thorough investigation of all cases of disappearances.
_16/ E/CN.4/1492, para. 106-109, E/CN.4/1492/Add. 1, paras. 13 and 19; E/CN.4/1983/14, paras. 64-69.

In letters dated 31 August and 20 Octooer '9S3 the Government of honduras provided information on the three reports of cases \*hich allegedly occurred m 1983 transmitted to it oy the Working i-roup m the ^ame veL-r. phe Govern eut reported that in two cases the persons were before the courts, and in ch« other case tne person had left the country and nad ^îven a oress conference ,t the Honduran Embassy m Guatemala. That information had previously been transmitted to the Uorking Group by a non-governmental organization.

The Government of honduras, in a letter dated 31 august 1983, provided information on cases transmitted by the working ьгоир auriny 1981 and 1982. Since the Working Group was established, the Government of Honduras has proviüeü the following replies concerning the cases transmitted to it: m 23 cases there was no record of the person's arrest; in 21 cases the reports were being investigated: tvo persons were before the courts; one person had )een Reported; one person had reappeared in a neighbouring country and one had been released. With regard to the four cases of foreign nationals /ho had disappeared in Honduras the Government saia that no jntry into Honduras haa be^n recorded for one, that the records showed that anotner t'o had left the country and that there was no record of arrest for tne fourth person. The Government further stated that, if petitioned by relatives m accordance *ith the procedures established by the law oi Honduras, it wo^lu agree to the exhumation of a body believed by some to ue that of me of the foreign nationals.

The lollowing is a statistical summary of the reports of enforced or involuntary disappearances in honduras dea it with oy the working Group since it was established:
I. Cases transmitted to the Government by the Working Group (see paras. 69-70 above) 69
JI. Government responses
(a) iota3 responses received from 'he
Government relating to cases transmitted by the Uoiking Group (swe pira. 73 above) 5 3
(b) Cases clarified by the Government's re spouse si_Z/ 5
II [. Cases clarified by information from non-governmental sources__' 1-3 17/ Persons who have left the countr^: 2 (1 deported to Panama, 1
reappeared m Guatemala). Persons before the courts: 2. Persons released by their captors; 1, 18/ Persons at liberty: 13.
E/CN.4/1484/21
G. Indonesia
Information reviewed and transmitted to the Government

The Working Group's previous activities in relation to Indonesia appear in its three prior reports.jL2/ In 1980 -md 1981 the Working Group transmitted to the Government oí Indonesia information on 23 reported disappearances which took place in the period 1977-1980. Eighteen persons reportedly uisappeared after they surrendered to military forces or were arrested or captured; one person disappeared from prison and one чаз allegedly shown on television by the authorities prior to his disappearance. Most were reportedly connected with the Frente Revolucionaria de Timor Leste Independents (FRETILIN).

During 1982 the Government of Indonesia reported that it had no further information to convey to the Working Group ana that it had concluded an agreement with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) with a view to finding the facts relating to the alleged missing persons as well as tracing them. The Government suggested that the Working Group should contact ICRC to obtain the appropriate information on the matter. In a letter dated 13 July 1983, ICRC stated that, following a discussion with those concerned, an informal understanding had been reached on the procedure for investigating cases of disappearances. In accordance with this understanding, as well as with ICRC principles, ICRC only proceeds with a tracing request from the family, keeping the Working Group informed about the progress of its investigations. The results will be communicated directly со the family only. Given the above, ICRC suggested that, in future, a copy of any inquiry received from a relative with a request for tracing in East Timor, should be forwarded to ICRC and the inquirer should be advised to contact ICRC directly. Should any progress be made after the receipt of requests from the respective families, ICRC - Tould inform accordingly. Later in the year the ICRC announced that it had suspended its activities on the main island of L'ast Timor.

The following is a statistical summary of the reports of enforced or involuntary disappearances in Indonesia dealt with by the working Group since it was established;
I. Cases transmitted to the Government by the Working Group (see para. 75 above) 23
II. Responses received from the Government relating to cases transmitted by the Working Group 0
III. Cases clarified by information from non-governmental sourcesrü' i
E/CN.4/1435, paras. 117-121; E/CN.4/1492, paras. 110-113; E/CN.4/1983/14, paras. 70-73.
20/ Persons arrested and in prison: 1.
II. Lebanon
Information reviewed and transmitted to the Government

The Working Group informed the Commission on Human Rights at its thirty-ninth session that in September 1982 it had transacted one report of an enforced or involuntary disppearance to the Government of Lebanon; it concerned the disappearance of a journalist of che IKNA Agency who reportedly disappeared in July ]982..rl/ The Working Group has received no further information on the case. Since the extension of its mandate the Working Group has received and examined information relating to enforced or imToLuntary disappearances in Lebanon brought to its attention by relatives of the persons concernea either directly or through an organization acting on Dehalf of the relatives of missing persons in Lebanon. The Working Group transmitted reports on 205 disappearances to the Government with its request for información. With regare' to other cases the Group either decided to request further information from the source of the report or found that the report did not appear to fall within its mandate.

In the cases transmitted to the Government since the extension of the Group's mandate, information иаз provided on the identity of che persons reported missing i first name and family name), dare and location of the arrest or disappearance and, generally, information about the persons responsible for the arrest. In a few cased, the occupation of the person was also provided. One case reportedly occurred in 1975, three cases in 197u. one in 1979, one in 1981, 162 in 1982 and 37 in 1983. A lew of the reported missing persons were women. The reports also alleged that the persons responbibie tor the arrest belonged to the Phalangisc Militia or Lebanese Army or its security forces; in some cases the Israeli A rmy was also reportedly involved in the jrrest together with one of the other forces mentioned above. Certain reports indicated that the arrests мехе, made by armed леи in civilian clothes operating from vehicles. Most of the arrests were witnessed by relatives, friends or neighbours and occurred in Beirut and its suburbs, in public places, at m e norae, or place of work of the victim or at military checkpoints which are sometimes permanent, and at other times mobile. In a number of cases the relatives reported that the missing person was arrested and taken away from the babra and Shatila camps in September 1982. In accordance .'ith the forking Group's mandate, it has oeen ensured that none of the cases transmitted are alleged to have arisen in the course of the international armed conflict in Lebanon (see paras. 2Û-21 above)-

Most of the reports stated that the disappearances had been brought to the attention of the Prime ilinister, the Mufti oí the Lebanese кс-pubLic, the Ministerial Commission estabished on 13 July 1983 to investigate the whereabouts of missing persons and the Internacional Committee of the ueO Cross.
21/ E/Cr T. ¿/1983/14, para, i/l.
E/CK.4/1984/21
Information an4 views received ¿rom organizations representing relatives of missing persons

During its eleventh session, the Working Group met representatives of the Committee of i4elatives of Detained, Disappeared and Abducted Persons in Lebanon. The representatives stated that their organization was established on 24 October 1982 as the result of a demonstration by women petitioning the Prime Minister for the liberation of detained prisoners and news août aetainees '/ho were missing. Since then the Committee has established an office and its work includes calling upon all relatives of detainees or disappeared persons to provide the information they have in person at the office of the Committee; on this basis the Committee draws up lists of cases for presentation to the authorities. The Committee also contacts political and religious leaders, and social organizations on behalf of the prisoners and the missing, as well as the Parliament, the Government Office and the Presidential Office. The Committee also maintains contacts with the International Committee of the Red Cross, embassies and organizations, holds press conferences and organizes demonstrations. The Committee is assisted by a group of Lebanese lawyers vfho have established a lawyers' organization for the defence of civil liberties. Unfortunately, many difficulties have been encountered in these activities and the results have been very few. For that reason, and despite the very limited resources of its members, the Committee decided to send a representative to Geneva to appeal to the Working Group.
82- The representatives of the Committee emphasized that their ..ction was not based on a hostile attitude towards the authorities nor on a desire to protect criminals. Their only point uas that the constitutional and iegal rules governing arrest and detention were not being observed (requirement of arrest warrants, for example) and that often the places of detention were illegal. Arrests for political motives were often carried out like kidnappings. The missing persons were usually arrested in the presence of witnesses and often at home; the Phalangist Militia or the Lebanese Army or its security forces were allegedly responsible. The representatives of the Committee provided numerous examples including that of a relative of one representative who was still missing.

The Committee had compiled a List of some 1,500 cases of disappeared persons which was only partial, since the situation in the country prevented parents from presenting their cases. The representatives gave details of the numerous steps taken by the Committee with the persons responsible for the forces which arrested the missing persons; its appeals nad not brought any results. The Working Group was informed of the establishment of the Ministerial Commission charged with investigating the disappeared (see para. SO above). The representatives of relatives stated that so far that Commission's only function had been to have the disappearances registered in Lhe local police stations and that no prisoner had been released or found as a result of its work. The Committee of Relatives had asi<.ed to be associated with the work of the Ministerial Commission, but its request had been rejected. The Committee of Relatives asked the Working Group to intervene with the Ministerial Commission which, its representatives said, had all the information needed for an investigation m its files.

The following is a statistical summary of the reports of enforced or involuntary disappearances in Lebanon dealt with by the Working Group since it was established:
I. Cases transmitted to the Government by
the Working Group (see para. 78 above) 206
II. Responses received from the Government
relating to cases transmitted by the Working Group 0
I. Nicaragua
Information reviewed and transmitted to the Government

The Working Group's previous activities in relation to Nicaragua appear in its three earlier reports.2LL' Since the renewal of its mandate in 1983 the Working Group has transmitted to the Government of Nicaragua reports on 55 disappearances submitted to the Working Group by a rlicaraguan. human rights organization on behalf of the relatives of the missing persons. Of the 55 cases, 8 reportedly occurred in 1981, 33 in 1У82 and 14 in. 1983. Information was provided on the identity of the persons reported missing (first names, family names), the date and location of the arrest and in many instances the age and occupation were given; the most frequently reported occupations were farmer, miner, bricklayer, carpenter, and army reservist. The reports also contain some details about the persons responsible, for the arrest: among those cited are the, State security forces, militias or persons in civilian clothes and many reports also state that the persons were arrested for counter-revolutionary activities.
Some of the reports transmitted to the Government contain details about the places where the persons were held after the arrest; among the most frequently cited are the prisons of Puerto Cabezas and Quinta Ye. Many reports also indicate that after the person had been detained in one of the above-mentioned places he izas transferred to Managua.

During 1980 and 1У81 the Working Group transmitted 70 reports of enforced or involuntary disappearances to the Government of Nicaragua; 60 relating to 1979 and 10 relating to 1980. The Government of Nicaragua informed the Working Group of the difficult circumstances surrounding the change in government in July 1979 and stated that it was legally and materially impossible to investigate the cases which had occurred prior to the end of 1979. The Government did provide information with regard to five of the cases which occurred in 1980; two persons had been released, one was being held for trial and in two cases the investigation had produced no results. In 1982 the Group transmitted to the Government a report about the disappearance of a Salvadoran fishing boat and its eleven-man crew in Nicaragua in December 1981; the relatives reported receiving information that the boat had been seen in a Nicaraguan port, that the radio had announced its seizure and the missing persons had been seen in a specified prison. The Government of El Salvador submitted similar information. In 1982, the Government of Nicaragua informed the Working Group that following investigations, no information had been obtained on the whereabouts of the fishing boat.

Since the Working Group was established it has transmitted 136 reports of enforced or involuntary disappearances to the Government of Nicaragua as is indicated in the table at the end of this section, rihe year" in which those, disppearances reportedly occurred were: 1979, 60 cases; 1980, 10 cases;
19 cases; 1982, 33 cases; and 1983, 14 cases.
_22/ E/CN.4/1435, paras* 131-144 and annex XV; E/CN.4/1435/AddЛ, para, 3; E/CN.4/1492, paras. 122-130 and annex XIV; E/CN.4/l¿+92, Add.l, para. 14; E/CM.4/1983/14, paras. 82-86.
Information and views received from organization representing relatives of missing persons

The working Group received < letter irorn а human rights organization m Nicaragua which states that disappearances in Nicaragua have increased since the state of emergency was pioclaimea on 15 ¡larch 1982, and Lhat most disappearances result from mass arrests carried out by the security forces in the Atlantic and northern regions of the country. A substantial number oi cases concern persons of Miskito origin ( ho were arrested on the Atlantic coast between December 1981 and Ju],y 1°82. The letter also states chat these persons ar^ kept m detención for an undetermined period of rime under the pretext that an investigation is bein^, carried out, ano that relatives are lot informed oi rheir whereabouts. Furthermore, the iotter reports chat the state of emergency has rendered ineffective habeas corpus proceedings cina other legal mechanisms used to locate missing persons.
Information and views received trom the Government of Nicaragua

Since the renewal of its mandate, the Working Group has received information in writing from the Government of Nicaragua, and a representative of the Government met the Group uuring its tenth session. The government representative assured the Group of his Government's support for its work and commitment to reinforce respect for fundamental human rights. He also made some observations about the Group's report to the Commission on human Rights at its thirty-ninth session, particularly relating LO the 70 reports of enforced or involuntary disappearances that the Group had brought to his Government's attention in 1^80 and 1981. He stated that his Government bau already transmitted ample information that had also been made available to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights which no longer considered those reports to concern disappeared persons. The representative also pointed out that his Government had already provided ample information з n writing (letter dated 29 November 1982) concerning the reported disappearance in Nicaragua of a Salvadoran fishing boat ano its eleven-man crew and that я Government representative had met the Group during its ninth session (December 1982). With regard to a relative's statement that the Salvauorans "ere being held at the Coyatepe Fortress he stated that it was no longer used as a detention centre and wns currently a museum o f the revolution. He gave the Group a photocopy of a letter from the International Committee of the Red Cross in Nicaragua in which it was stated that Red Cross delegates no longer visited the Coyotepe Fortress as it had been closed down in March 1981„ The Government transmitted the same information in letters dated '•> and 30 uune 1983.

In a letter dated 13 September 1983 the Government transmitted information on the txTO 1980 cases thai the Group nar! arst jrought to its attention on 29 May 1981 and, at the Govemirent's request, again on 19 May 1983. The Government reiterated the information it had transmitted on 31 August 1981 and commented on the nature of the two reports. Concerning the first report, the Government noted that, according to the elatíves, ( he missing person had left his home and never returned, he was reported to have been held in Coyotepe Fortress, a member of the militia reported seeing him in the ''Zona Franca" (free zone) and other information placed him in another country. In regard to those allegations, the Government stated that Coyotepe Fortress 'as no lunger used LO hold detainees; that members of the militia were neLther member:s of the police nor of the army
E/CN.4/1*84/21
and that they therefore had no access to detention centres, and that if the person vas in another country, chat country's authorities should be asiced to provide information. With regard to the second case the Government pointed out that two different dates of arrest were given (June 1979 and 2 January 198u), that no mention was made of x^itnesses to the arrost not was a description of the persons supposedly responsible ior the arrest given. The Government stated that in June 1079 the Somoza regime was still in power and that the part of the report which alleged that the rrest took place on ? January 1980 in Esteli also indicated that the person was seen on the same'day in the "Zona Franca" (free sone) in ."Managua; however, îv!snagua was 140 kilometres from the rural area of Esteli and transport in a single day was very difficult.

The following is a statistical summary oi the reports of enforced or involuntary disappearances in Nicaragua dealt with by the Working Group since it vas established:
I. Cases transmitted to the Government >y the Working Group (see paras. 85-87 above) 136
II. Government responses
( 0 Total responses received irom the Government relating to cases transmitted by the Working Group 81 (b) Cases clarified by the Government's '-' 3 / n responses.^' J 22/ At liberty: 2 In prison: 1, The Government stated that >5 of the cases haci i^een before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and that that Organization no longer considered them to oe disappeared persons; in 13 cases the Government had no records of the person having been arrested.
L/Ci\.4/b'b4/21
J. Philippines
Información reviewed and transmitted to the Government

The Working Group's previous activities in relation to the Philippines are described m its earlier reports to the Commiss ion.±_t' Since the extension of the Working Group's mandate, it has transmit:ted reports of J9 disappearances to the Government of the Philippines; 16 cases reportedly occurred in 1983 and the others in previous years (1 m i97>, 11 in 1980, 15 in L 81 and lu m 1982). With regard to a number of other cases, the Group decided either to request further information from the sources or th^t they _<id not appear to fail within the limits of its mandate.

The majority uf the cases transmitted dealt with disappearances in tne rural areas. Not all reports contained such ample descriptions as those relating to other countries but they aid include the name and family name uf the person reported missing, the date and place of disappearance and generally information on nationality and sex. A quarter of the reports gave an indication of the profession of the missing person, such as farmer, construction contractor, fisherman, worker or ousinessman; tv-ю trade unionists and a lay church worker were also among those who had allegedly disappeared. As regards the circumstances of the isappearances, m most cases the person was arrested at home, at his place of work, or during a raid in the area. In some instances, details were given about the police or military forces responsible tor the arrest, such as the Philippine Constabulary (PC), the Combined Security Unit (CSU) or the Military Intelligence Group (MIG); in certain cases the names of the persons in command were also provided. In other instances, the persons responsible for the arrest were described as wearing civilian clothes, using military vehicles or they were simply reported by the sources as belonging to the armed forces. Inquiries addressed by the relatives to the authorities about the missing person's whereabouts had yielded no results.

Uith regard to two of the 1983 disappearances (a trade unionist ana a lay church worker,! , a non-governmental organization informed the Working Group that after their reported iisappearance the persons had been presented to a court and charged with criminal offences; the Government oí the Philippines confirmed this inrormation with regard to one of the cases.

Prior to the latest extension of its mandate, the Working Group had transmitted 201 cases of disappearances to the Government ; in most of those cases information on the circumstances of the arrest of the missing person, the place of detention, and the public forces involved vas given ana in some cases the existence of witnesses was reported. In 1982, the Government provided the following information on the cases transmitted: 38 persons had been released, 6 were free and their occupations given, 2 had escaped from prison. In 7 other cases, the missing person was reported uead and those responsible were being 24/ Е/СГ.4/1435, paras. 145-14У; E/CN.4/1492, paras. 131-137; E/CN.4/1492/Add.l, paras. 15-16; E/CN.4/1983/14, paras. 87-90.
Е/СМ.4/1Л84/21
prosecuted. With regard to 36 cases, investigations had been carried out and it had 'jeen established that: the Government jas not responsible. ihe Government reported that investigations into 88 cases were being continued and that the Group would be informed of the results. Finally, the Government requested more details on the identities of 24 persons -reported missing where the details which had been given were insufficient to permit an"Jnvestigation. The Government provided information on the legal protection of detainees, on the remedies available for complaints from citizens «гь- on the difficulties of carrying out investigations in с large and populous country like the Philippines.

Since the Working Group wns established it has transmitted 260 reports of enforced or involuntary disappearances to the Government of the Philippines as ic indicated in the cable at the enci of this section. 'he years ta which those disppearances reportedly occurred were: 1975, 7 cases; 1976, 46 cases; 1977, 28 cases; 1 W 8 , 32 cases; 10 79, 5G cases; 1980, 44 cabes. 1<J81 , 21 cases; 1982, 16 cases; and 1983, 16 cases,

During the 'forking group's eleventh session it met the Permanent Representative of the Philippines to the United Nations Office at Geneva Xirtio renewed his Government's commitment re active co-operation ч ith the Group and stated thai, as soon as information was availaole from the investigations on outstanding cases, the Working Group would j»a informed. In a letter dated 11 August 1983, the Permanent Mission of the Philippines to the United Nations Office at Geneva referred to four reportr of disappearances brought to trie Government's attention by the Working Group in 1983; one person was in prison and no informât"'on was availab'c on three others, the three cases were being investigated- Prior to its twelfth sess'on, che Working Group, in a letter dated '/8 October 1У83, informed the Government of the Philippines that it would like to consider at that session aay information the Government might wish to send in relation to the cases i^hich hau aot been clarified.

The following is a statistical summary of the reports of enforced or involuntary disappearances in the Philippines dealt with by the Working Group since it was established;
I. Cases transmitted to the Government by the Working Group (see paras. 92-96 above) 260
II. Government responses
(a) Total responses received from the
Government relating to cases transmitted
to it by the Working Group (see paras. 94, 95 and Ы .move; 205 (t>) Cases clarified by the Government's
III. Cases clarified by information from non-governmental sources^'
25/ Persons released from detention: 38
Persons at lioerty: 6 Persons Lseing detained; 1 Persons whose death has been officially recorded: 7
26/ Persons arrested ,md in prison: 2.
E/CM.4/1984/21
К. Uruguay
Information reviewed and transmitted to the Government

In its first three reports,±Z/ the 'Joriino; Group informed the Commission about enforced or involuntary disappearances in Uruguay. Since the extension of its mandate in 1983, the working Group has transmitted reports concerning nine disappearances to the Government of Uruguay; three occurring m Uruguay and six in Argentina. In the three cases x/hich reportedly occurred in Uruguay, the arrests took place in 1983; two of these persons were later released and the third pas located in a Uruguayan prison. Concerning the six uisappearances which reportedly occurred in Argentina, five of the persons were arrested in 1977 and one in 1978. In four of the six cases, the missing person ^as reportedly seen by former detainees in detention centres under the authority of Uruguayan military personnel and m two ca^es information uas provided on the transfer of the missing person to Uruguay.

Since it was established, the forking Group has transmitted reports oti the disappearance of 43 persons to the Government of Uruguay; 19 of those allegedly occurred in Uruguay and 2k outside that country (22 m Argentina and 2 in Paraguay). The years in which these disappearances took place are: in 1974, 1; in 1975, 2; in 1976, 11; in L977, lo; in 1978, 7; in b8U, 2; in Iy81, 1; and 3 in 1983. In those cases occurring outside Uruguay the missing person was reported to have Uruguayan nationaJ ity and to have oeen arrested or held m detention by Uruguayan security forces. The Government informed the Working Group that the two persons who were reported to have disappeared m Uruguay in 1980 were being held in prison.

In 1983, the Working Group wrote to the Government of Uruguay and reviewed the information on enforced or involuntary disappearances which had been transmitted to that Government, requesting clarification of those cases which had not yet been resolved. The unresolved cases concerned reports of the disappearance of 13 persons ii Uruguay, 72 Uruguayan nationals in Argentina and 2 Uruguayan nationals in Paraguay. Copies of the reports of the disappearances were also transmitted and contained information on the identity of the missing person, including his profession, the date and place of disappearance, and generally the circumstances of the arrest; the Organization for the Co-ordination of Anti-Subversive Operations (OCOA) and various military units were reportedly responsible for the arrests. Tn connection ;ith those cases occurring in Argentina, a list was provided of reports by 10 persons who stated they were held in detention centres m Argentina, that Uruguayan officials ^ere involved in the arrest of Uruguayan nationals in Argentina and in the running of the detention centres, and that Uruguayan nationals were transferred from Argentina to Uruguay. With regard to the two Uruguayans who disappeared in Paraguay, the Group provided copies of reports bv three persons who stated that they were held in the same cell in Paraguay with the missing persons who were subsequently transferred to Uruguay. In its letter, the wording Group noted that some of the above-mentioned reports of former detainees had been 2J_/ E/CM.4/1435, paras. 150-lo3 and annex XVI; E/Ch ,4/14J5//uid. i, para. 5; E/CN.4/1492, paras. 142-147 and annex XVI; E/CN.4/1492/Add.1, para. 18; E/CK.4/1983/14, paras. 9]-°Ь. taken into considérât LOU uy the Human Rights committe^ when it îound that; Uruguayan officers had been involved in the detention of a Uruguayan national in Argentina and m che transfer oi that person to Uruguay.
Information and views received from relatives of missing persons and their organizations

Relatives' organizations se-it the Working Group expressions of their deep concern at the Government's indifference in the face of concrete and duly documented facts about uisappearances. rhe relatives referreu to the Government's announcement in October 1976 that 62 "subversives" had been arrested, but pointed out that subsequently the identities of only ¿0 or them had ever been determined; they expressed the fear that che remaining 42 corresponded to the 42 Uruguayan nationaJs arresteu in Argentina up to October 1976 whose whereabouts remained unknown. The relatives stated that, in fact, up to October 1 W 6 a total of 62 Uruguayans had been arrested iu Argentina; the detention of 20 was subsequently officially acknowledged, as they were transferred to Uruguay where some were placed in prison and others were released. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, on 20 July 1970, had appealed to the Government of Argentina on Dehaif oi 19 Uruguayan refugees including 14 who had been arrested in Argentina and were eventually placed in prison in Uruguay. rhe relatives hope the identities anu îate of the 42 unidentified "subversives" will be investigated. Their concerns were brought to the attention of the Government in 1^8J.

Relatives of two persons who disappeared in 1975 ana 1976 in Uruguay transmitted to the Working Group two documents of the uuraan Rights Committee containing the Committee's view that the authorities of Uruguay were responsible for the detention of the missing persons; the Committee requested the Government to take effective steps to establish what had happened to them. The relatives stated that no steps had been Lateen anc! asked the Uorking Group Lo continue its consideration of the cases in order to obtained the needed information. The Working Group transmitted these requests to the Government in 1983 and requested any views the Government might wish to present.
Information and views received from the Government oi Uruguay

The Working Group informed the Commission on Human lights at its thirty-ninth session about the general and specific information received from the Government of Uruguay in 1980, 1981 and 1982.2£j The Working Group reported, inter alia, that the Government had askea that disappearances oe considered within the context of the general situation and conditions prevailing in Uruguay during the period of internal turmoil uiu had stated that, in fighting subversion, government forces had acted in accordance with the law ацё that all criminals had been brought before the courts and judged. The Goverment asked that the problem of missing persons be given its real dimension. Of the 100 or so cases reported only о or 10 had allegedly taken place in Uruguay; with regard to those cases, the Government was making every effort to determine the persons' whereabouts, but denied any complicity or 28/ fi/CN. 4/1983/14, рагнь. 93- ()4.
Е/СЯ.4/1984/21
page ЗЪ responsibility. For those occurring outside the country, the Government had made many efforts to obtain information and a special office had ueen established to help relatives of missing persons. In addition to general information, the Government provided the following information regarding specific cases which reportedly occurred in Uruguay: arrest warrants had been issued with regard to 11 persons who were still being sought; three persons hau been registered in an hotel far away from the reported place of disappearance on the day they allegedly disappeared; one person had leit the country; one haa escaped from prison; no information was available on another two persons and three people who reportedly disappearea in 1980 and 198L were in prison.

Since the extension of its mandate in 1983, the Working Group has received information from the Government of Uruguay concerning three cases of disappearances which occurred in 1983 and were transmitted to the Government. The Government informed the Working Group that two of those persons had oeen released while the third was in prison. In relation to a decision of the Human Rights Committee referred to in a letter from a relative vhich was transmitted by the Working Group to the Government of Uruguay, the Government stated that it had informed the Human Rights Committee that the person was being sought on subversion charges. The Committee had subsequently adopted a decision which contained terms the Government considered offensive ana the Government nad criticized the Committee because its procedures disregarded legal rules relating to presumption of guilt jnd because of the haste of its decision. The Government continued to co-operate with the Committee, but objected to the specific action taken because no review machinery was provided for decisions which in some cases were taken without the usual guarantees as to evidence.

During its twelfth session the Working Group met the representative of Uruguay to the Commission on Human Rights who reviewed the full co-operation his Government had given the líorRing Group since its establishment and reiterated his Government's commitment to continue that co-operation. The Working Group had achieved important results and Uruguay had supported it in the Commission on Human Rights. In the past, Uruguay had provided as much information as was possible on the individual cases presented; the Group's renewed request had been transmitted to the competent authorities in Uruguay and the response of the Government would be given as soon as possible.

Each individual case was a matter of deep concern for the Government. On the few cases which were reported to have occurred in Uruguay and remained unclarified the investigation remained open. The Government had given special attention to those Uruguayan nationals who had disappeared outside the country. There were 122 such cases unclarified to date and a special office had been established in the Foreign Ministry to receive the relatives' reports and assist in the search for the missing person. The work of the office included approaches on the diplomatic level and assistance to relatives in court proceedings in the country of disappearance; in some cases the results were positive and the missing person naa been found. A full file had been submitted to the Intel—American Commission on Human Rights showing the steps taken by the Goverrnent of Uruguay to protect its nationals who disappeared in other countries. With regard to the statements of persons who claimed that they had been transferred to Uruguay from a neighbouring country, some of those statements had been made after the persons concerned had been released from detention and had come to Europe. The persons concerned hau ueen arrested in Uruguay, some had been released and others tiaa ueen charged c,nd tried in court; today the majority were free- It was to be emphasized that Uruguayan security services, in the difficult period of terrorism, had acted to arrest the persons concerned and not to make them disappear. Those services were not responsible for disappearances.

The following is a statistical summary of the reports of enforced or involuntary disappearances in Uruguay dealt with by the Working Group since it was established:
I. Cases transmitted to the Government by the Working Group (see paras. 99-100 above) 43
II. Government responses
(a) Total responses received from the
Government relating to cases transmitted by the Working Group (see para. 104-105 above) 24
(b) Cases clarified by the Government's responses^./ 6 29/ Persons released from detention; 2 Persons arrested and in prison: 4.

In its three previous reports, the Working Group has informed the Commission about enforced or involuntary disappearances in South Africa and Namibia, the cases transmitted to the Government of South Africa and the South African legislation on the matter.±J

Since the extension of its mandate m 1983, the Working Group has transmitted, by a letter dated 16 December 1983, one case of an enforced or involuntary disappearance which reportedly occurred in South Africa to the Government, together with a request for any information the Government might wish to send. The case concerns a student .nü member of the Congress of South African Students (COSAS) who was detained for five months after he had been arrested during demonstrations in Port Elizabeth in 1981. Upon his release from detention, he was admitted to a hospital. According to the information received by the Group on this case, medical tests at the hospital showed that he had been poisoned. The student then filed charges against the Minister of Law and Order, together with a demand for compeusflti on regarding the ill-treatment to which he had been subjected while in detention. After he returned to the hospital, accompanied by a friend, both men reportedly disappeared.

Prior to the present extension of its mandate, the Working Group transmitted to the Government o£ South Airicó. reports regarding three disappearances in that country. A non-government organization in consultative status with the Economic ana Social Council provided details obtained trom relatives on these three instances of enforced or involuntary disappearances in South Africa which occurred in l''7b, 1977 and 1978. Three wen were arrested by the South African authorities on the basis of the various national security provisions referred to below. ïheir families were told that they had been released by the authorities, but the three men were never seen again after their arrests. Despite repeated requests by the Group for information on these cases, no response from the Government has been received.

Since the extension о С its mandate the WorKing Group has transmitted one report of an enforced or involuntary disappearance which allegedly occurred in Namibia. A non-governrncntal organisation in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council reported that the person was one of 25 arrested together in August 1980 ay security forces because they were suspected of assisting SWAPO guerrillas. The report contained the further information that relatives had initiated lega] action before the WinahoeK. Supreme Court in order V E/CN.¿71435, p-jras. 175-183; Е/Сь.4/1442, paras. 158-lb3; E/CN.4/1983/14, paras. 96-1ПО. to clarify the person's fate. According to in formation they had received from the police, one person had been abducted or killed by the guerrillas. Л witness, however, stated that the person had aiea unaer torture while in detention.

In its earlier reports, the Working Group reviewed the information received in connection with the adjournment of a hearing by the Windhoek Supreme Court т/ith respect to the application by the vives of three men about the fate of their husbands whom they claimed hau been detained by South African forces. That information vas transmitted to the Government of Souch Africa in a letter dated 21 December 1980 with the Group's request for any information which the Government might wish to supply. Despite the renewal of that request in ]981 and 1982j no response has been received.

In its earlier reports, the Working Group also dealt with information to the effect that the South African authorities had detained persons in neighbouring countries, transported them to Namibia and, by refusing-to acknowledge the detentions, effectively caused those persons to disappear, The particular case mentioned concerned about 120 people detained at Kassmga in Southern Angola during a raid in May 1973 by South African forces; it is thought that they are being held at a camp near hor ap Dam in Namibia. According to information available to the Group, these persons were held under the South West Africa Administrator General's Proclamation act AG9, althougn it oaly allows detention without charge for 30 days. Again, no response has been received from the South Atrican Government.

In chapter IV of the Working Group's first report,.t/ an attempt was made to set out: those parts of relevant statutes which led to the conclusion that South Africa's law provided for "a person to be detained by the police against his v/ill not only incommunicado, but without, his relatives ')eín¿ entitled to any information at all." The Group's analysis of the legislation then m force was published and the South African Government has been persistently invited to comment on whether that analysis and those conclusions were accurate and comprehensive. lib. In the meantime, the Commission on Security Legislation, under the chairmanship of Chief Justice jxabie, has made its report. A net statute on internal security entitled the Internal Security Act (No. 74 of 1982), has since been introduced and repeats much of the earlier legislation referred to in the Group's first report; however, the defmiton of "terrorism" in section 2 of the Terrorism Act (No. 83 of 1967) quoted in paragraph 176 of the Group's report is not reproduced. The new Act contains new aad extensive definitions of terms such as "communism" on the basis of which criminal offences are formulated and freedom of association circumscribed; these are, however, ot no relevance to the Working Group's mandate» What concerns the Group is the extent to which it is still possible for persons to be secretly detainee *>у virtue of laws adopted following strictly Parliamentary procedures.
2/ ji/CN.4/1435, paras. 175-177,

The new Act has the effect of repeating much of the earlier provisions but vtfith amendments which are significant in the preseut context. First, persons identified by the executive as being of a subversive character may be restricted so that they must remain in, or must not go to, certain speciried places (section 19). Second, certain persons may be detained in prison on the authority of the executive if it is considered chat sucn detention will prevent the commission of certain offences or the endangering of the security of the State or the maintenance of law and order (section 28).

Furthermore, access to the restricted or detained persons is prohibited and no one is entitles to receive official information relating to or obtained from such a person. There is a statutory board of review, independent of Government and at present composed of a retired Supreme Court Judge, a retired Regional Court Magistrate, and a practising attorney, which has substantial powers of intervention ол behalf or persons subject to sections 19 or 28- The provisos to sections 19(1) ana 28(8) also grant statutory assurance of access to the person concerned by his legal representative (provided that the legal representative is not also "on the list"). The Group understands this to mean that a person subject to these measures way at least use these provisos to inform his family of his detention, or restriction, and of his whereabouts.

Two subsequent sections, however, enable persons to be detained Sy order of the executive, apparently with greater possibility of being held incommunicado. Section 2*> allows for the detention of persons ior interrogation for a period of 30 days initially and subsequently for successive periods without limit. Section 31 deals siraiiarly with potential witnesses to the commission of certain specified security offences, although there is a limit on such detention, which is determined by the conclusion of the criminal proceedings concerning the principal accused person, or the failure to charge that person within six months. During uetention, however, the person under interrogation or the witness may only be visited by,an Inspector of Detainees and must be seen once a fortnight in private by ^ magistrate and a district surgeon; the courts are expressly deprived of jurisdiction to order the release of either category of person,

The 1982 Act does not indicate the extent (if any) to which persons detained or restricted under the four sections mentioned above may be able to inform their relatives of their whereabouts. Whilst the legal representative may, under sections 19 and 28, be able to convey at least this minimum of essential information, sections 29 md 31 are silent on the point. It is valuable for the Working Group to have information about the 1982 Act; unfortunately the material has arrived too late for the full implications, relevant to the Group's mandate, to be properly explored. Mor has it been possible to investigate the extent to which the Police Amendment Act, 19&0, as well as other legislation, effectively precludes relatives from knowing what has happened со persons arrested for subversive activities.
IV. OTHER REPORTS OF ENFORCED OR INVOLUbaARY DISAPPEARANCES
DEALT WITH IN VARIOUS WAYS BY THE WORKING GROUP
Angola
121 •j During its eleventh session the Working Group reviewed reports received from relatives and a non-governmental organization concerning five pers »ns who allegedly disappeared in Angola in mid-197 7. The occupations of the miss *rg persons were that of administrator, electrical engineer and government official, political leader, physician and Protestant priest. Their nationalities were either Angolan or Portuguese. Family members reported that the arrests oi their relatives were made by the Popular Defence Organization (PDO) a-id the Angolan Information and Security Services (DISA). One person vas reportedly arrested at home and tne family of another haa contact, with him in prison. Various sources reported to the relatives that some of them had been taken to specified police stations or detention centres, others were reported to have been transferred from prison to a labour camp or an unknown destination.

In accordance with established practice the Chairman wrote to the Government of Angola on 28 October 1983 informing it of the Group's mandate and humanitarian purpose. In a letter of 31 Octooer 198J the Chairman, pursuant to the Group's decision, transmitted the information on the cases described above to the Government, with a request for any information the Government might wish to submit. The Government of Angola was invited to send a representative to the twelfth session of the Working Group and to provide aay information it wished at that session. To date no response has been received from the Government.

In 1V81, the Working Group transmitted to the Government of Brazil reports received from relatives concerning seven cases of disappearances which allegedly occurred in Brazil between 1970 and 1974.1.' Three of thf 1 missing persons were students; the others were a teacher, a computer programmer, a puolic employee, and a member of the Navy. Some reports included information from former prisoners or unofficial confirmations indicating that the laisdng person was held by the authorities. The Government reported that three of the -nissing persons had been tried in their absence by military courts and tnat with regard to the others, no criminal records hau been discovered. The Government also stated that in one case the State had been found responsible for the disappearance by the court of first instance, that the relatives' right to compensation had been recognizeu ana that the judgement hau been appealed.

Since the extension of its mandate the Working Group has renewed its request for any further information which mignt 'есоше available; in particular with regard to those reports which contained specific statements that a person 1/ E/CN.4/1983/14, paras. 102-104. had been detained in certain localities, the Group requested information on any progress which might have been made in following up those statements. In a letter dated 3 June 1983, the Permanent Representative of Brazil to the united Nations at Geneva stated that it had not yet been possible to determine the whereabouts of the persons reported missing in Brazil. Nevertheless, the elements provided by the Working Group concerning those persons continued to be taken into account by the Brazilian Government and any information which might result from the ongoing research would be duly communicated to the Working Group,

In a letter dated 10 November 1983 the Permanent Representative of Brazil to the united Nations Office at Geneva reported that there had been no new developments in the situation and that the appeal made against the judgement mentioned above uas still pending in court.

In 1981, the Working Group brought to the attention of the Government of Chile reports that two Chilean nationals who were preparing to enter Chile with false documentation had been arrested on 19 February 1981 on the Chilean-Argentine border.z.1 No response has been received from the Government on these cases.

The Working Group has been concerned since its first session with the protection of persons who submit information on enforced or involuntary disappearances to it. In that connection, the Chairman of the Working Group addressed a letter to the Permanent Representative of Chile to the United Nations Office at Geneva, on 12 August 1983, in which he referred to reports received by the Working Group that Ms. Cecilia Rodriguez, a member oí the Executive Committee of the Latin American Federation of Associations for Relatives of Disappeared-Detainees (FEDEFAM), had been arrested on 2 February 1983 as she was boarding a flight to Europe. The Chairman pointed out that FEDEFAM had provided the Working Group with information about enforced or involuntary disappearances and that the Group had been informed that one of the purposes of Ms. Rodriguez1 trip was to see that further information was received by the Group. The Chairman expressed the Wonting Group's concern about the matter and said that the Group would be grateful for any information the Government might wish to send.

In a letter dated 20 September 1983 the Permanent Representative of Chile to the United Nations Office at Geneva acknowledged receipt of the above-mentioned letter and stated that the competent national authorities had taken due note of its contents. The Permanent Representative informed thé Group's Chairman that hs. Rodriguez had been unconditionally released by the Court of Appeals and that she was at liberty.
2/ E/CN.4/1492, paras. 63-64.
Revolutionary People'& Republic or Guinea

Since its establisnment. the Working Croup has transmitted to the Government of the Revolutionary People's Republic oí Guinea information received from relatives concerning the disappearance of eight persons in Guinea.±' The missing persons were arresteo at home, at military premises, at their work place or at a police border control station; in some cases the arrest wa& witnessed by one or more persons.

In 10-82 the Working Group was informed that the relatives had received a statement from the European Parliament to the effect that the Government of Guinea had reported that seven of the missing persons had been executed and pne had escaped. The relatives pointed out that this information was vague» no exact dates were given, and that three of the persons were reportedly executed prior to the date of their arrest. Th*3 relatives also reported that the Government of France had received different information on these cases from the Government of Guinea from that given to the European Parliament. The date of execution was different i ' four cases and in one case tne Government of Guinea had reported that the person had escaped from prison in i 971; in fact, that person had been Head of the Private Office (chef de Cabinet) of the minister for Foreign Affairs throughout 1971 and up to August 1972.

The Working Group has repeatedly contactée the Government oi the Revolutionary People's Republic of Guinea and requested confirmation and clarification of the information reportedly given Lo the European Parliament and the Government of France. The Working Group has also written to the relatives of the missing persons to determine whether the}' have receiveu any further information,

The Working Group stated, in its report to the thirty-eighth session of the Commission on Human Rights ,z/ that i_t huu transmitted 10 cases of reported disappearances to the Iranian Government in 1982, among them the cases of two girls who cere allegedly taken away from school by governmental authorities ip 1981. Eleven of the lfr persons were reportedly, arrested at a private home in Teheran on 21 August 14*80; one other person reportedly disappeared m 1У80 ana two in 1979. At its eighch session m 1982, the Working Group met the Charge d'affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission ol the Islamic Republic pi Iran, who stated that the información transmitted to his Government was not sufficiently detailed and that more information should be outained ir his Government was to carry out an effective investigation. Such information has been sought, from the source of the reports.

Since the extension of its mandate, the u'orkmg Group has received further reports regarding enforced or involuntary disappearances of persons, including children, in the Isiamjc Republic or Iran. In connection with certain of those 3/ E/CN,4/1^83/14, paras. 112-113.
4/ b/CN.4/1492, paras. 114-117.
Е/Сь.4/1*84/21
reports the Working Group decided to ask for more information from the source, while, with regard to others, the Group was of the view that they did not appear to fall within its mandate. horocco

In its report to the Commission at its thirty-ninth session, the Working Group stated that it had transmitted to the Government of horocco information it had received from relatives about seven persons reported to have disappeared in the years 1972 to 1974; three of the persons (brothers) were reportedly arrested at their home on the same date in 1973, anu the other four persons concerned were reported to have disappeared from prison.±!

In a letter dated 20 June 1983, the Government of Morocco informed the Working Group of the results of its investigations. With regard to the reported disappearance of three brothers who were said to have been arrested on the same day at their home, the Government stated that the records of the courts, the Ministry of Justice and the prisons had been searched, but that no record of criminal charges or of any other judicial procedures regarding the brothers had been found. In the Government's view, they should be sought outside the country. The Government stated that two other persons had been sentenced by the courts to 20 years' imprisonment for oifences against the security of the State; another person had been sentenced to death in absentia and was still being sought. Finally, the seventh person had oeen acquitted by verdict in 1У73. In accordance with established procedure this information was brought to the attention of the relatives of the missing persons.

Since the extension of its mandate, the Working Group has received reports of three disappearances in Morocco transmitted by relatives of the individuals concerned. One person was a student union leader who was allegedly arrested in the presence of witnesses upon his return to Morocco from a holiday in June 1981; two weeks after the incident, a Moroccan newspaper reportedly confirmed the details of the day and place of his arrest. The relatives report having received information on the places where î.e was subsequently detained. Two other students were reportedly arrested in 1983, one in January ana tne other in February: the first was allegedly arrested in front of witnesses, at a friend's home together \¿ith a person who was subsequently released; his family reported that prior to the arrest they had been questioned about his alleged participation in a student strike and demonstrations. The second student was reportedly arrested at home in the presence of witnesses by judicial police who showed credentials (the name of one was provided as well as the licence number of the car used); the relative reports having received information on the place of the person's detention from February to April 1983. Pursuant to established practice, these reports were transmitted to the Government of Morocco with the Working Group's requesL to receive any information it might wish to send.
5/ ¿/CN.4/1983/14, paras. 122-123.
Paraguay
13 7. In its report Lo the thirty-seventh session ol the Commission on Human Rights, the forking Group stated that i4, had been informed of many cases oí enforced or involuntary disappearances m wnicn members or the security forces of more than one country were alleged to have been involved.£' Among those cases, the Working Group mentioned a report concerning a Uruguayan citizen allegedly abduetea in Paraguav, taken to Argentina m an Argentine military aircraft ana eventually transferred to Uruguay.

During 1983, the Working Group transmitted to the Government of Paraguay five reports of enforced or involuntary disappearances. Of the five disappearances, four reportedly occurred in Asunción, Paraguay and one m Argentina. In the latter case, the pecson was reported to hctve Paraguayan nationality and to have been transferred from Argentina to Paraguay; he was reportedly seen by a witness at ai Army detention centre за Paraguay and then transferred to an unknown destination. Further, witn regard to this case, relatives of the missing person report having been arrestect in Paraguay a few days after the missing person's «ifres г in Argentina; they state that they were held in official and secret detention centres in Paraguay and 'ere interrogated on the missing person's activities. Of the four casto alleged to have occurred in Paraguay, one of the disappeared persons is i Uruguayan national and the other three are Argentine nationals; all four were reportedly transferred to their respective countries after a oeriod of detention in Paraguay.

In connection with the above-mentioned cases of four persons arrested in Paraguay, the Working Group also transmitted to the Government of that country a report from two persons who state that they were detained at the investigation police headquarters in Asunción, Paraguay, where they shared a cell with the four missing persons. According to the authors of this report, the four persons were transferred to their respective countries (one to Uruguay and three to Argentina) guarded by security personnel from those countries, and the Paraguayan police noted in their records that they had been released. The authors of the report are two Paraguayan nationals who state that they were arrested in Misiones, Argentina, and handed over to the Paraguayan police at the frontier between Argentina and Paraguay, while the Argentine police recorded their release in Argentina at the same time as the transfer was oemg carried out.

The Working Group has receiver information 1 rom relatives of missing persons of Paraguayan nationality, vho state that it is difficult to obtain reports on disappearances m Paraguay from the relatives, because tear often prevents them from contacting international organizations. They also report that in cases which occurred in Argentina, the missing persons were probaoiy sent back to Paraguay, as is the case for sorte who have been seen in detention centres there.
6/ E/CM.4/143b, para. 173, ind E/CN.4/1435/Ada, 1 , p<ira.

In a note verbale dated 20 January 198J , addressed to the Chairman of the Working Group, in-- ОЧл •* j-uni« nf ->i P? >-CÍ¿ iy ^.plicíi I y i ici-_CdtPC that it had no objection to the Working Group having access to any relevant information which might have been su knitted by the Government to the Commission од Human Rights under tne procedure governed Ъ^ Ее or oír [ -^ and Sonil Council resolution 1503 (XLVIII) of 27 Hay 1970. It does not appear th^t any information of relevance to these cases has been received from the Government of Paraguay within the framework of that procedure.

During 1^82 the Working Group transmitted to the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic information on three disappearances uhich reportedly occurred in 1980.Z' One of the reports concerns a medical aoctor who * as reportedly summoned tc the Office of Heads of Prisons in lloms and detained there; a weeu after his arrest he WJS transferred to on ипкпоип upstmat ю п . The second case also concerns a uocior who iras arresLcd ami accused of membership and activities on behalf of the Muslim brotherhood; since his arrest his v'hereabouts nave been unknown. The thirc report concerns a stuaeut who was reputedly arrested by security agents, together with tivo i el low students, al his home in August 1У80; he was said to have been taken to a specified prison.

Since the extensio i oi its mandate, the 'Jorksng Group has contacted the Government of the Syrian Arab Republic to request any information it might wish to send regarding Lhese cases. ю date, no information has been received from the Government on the above cases.

During the vears 1)8J and 1982, the Working Group transmitted to the Government of Z^ire v"epo >*fs nn the enforced or involuntary disappearance of 15 men which illegealy occurred m lJ7j vfive persons), л 977 (one person), 1978 (two persons), 197 e» (one pe'ion), and l c'81 isix persons) in the region of Bas-Zaire, in the southern regions of Kivu or з n Uvira; soldiers or military intelligence officers vere reported to have made the arrests in some cases._' In most cases, the arreotou p-rscn was allegedly taken to a. named aetention centre and in one case a person arresced with Jie missing person reported sharing detention with him until Ins release. A non-governmental organization subsequently informed the Wcrki ¡я Group that two persons (arrested m i977 and 1981 respectively) hed bee i ret pasea. In ]98_3 the UorKing Group met а representative of the Government who exoreseü tie Government's interest in co-operating tfi Lh the \iorlci.Tig Group LU n,o'r LO clarify the case.

Since tho extension of i _s iupc'ate tiio Working Group has continued to request information f^Oin tho Go /o-^nmr n\ of / ш re and at its eleventh session the Group net the Permanent Representative of Lb.¿ Republic of Zaire to the United Nations Office al Cenefa. ;b^ expressed his Government's willingness to provide 1J , 8/ E/CN.4/1983/14, par^. " further information on the cases concerned. In a letter ciaced 1У August 1983, the Permanent Representative of the Republic of Zaire conveyed a written communication on behalf of the Secretary of State of the Department of External Affairs of the Republic of Zairp to the Working Group. The Government stated that there were no cases of disappearance iu ¿aire, that such a practice was not employed, but rather that measures of pardon and clemency were used for persons who endangered the security of the State. Reference was made to an amnesty lav/ of 21 Hay 1983 by virtue of which there were currently no prisoners of conscience in Zaire. The По /ernraent stated that, if any other information of an objective character was available, it would be examined by the competent autorities.
Other matters

In its report to the thirtv-nirith session of the Comniission on Human Rights,.2/ the Working Group reported on its adoption of an auxiliary procedure used to handle a few cases of alleged disappearances, not otherwise referred to in the report, on an informal basis. This procodu^e was ubed at the Group's discretion in order to facilitate its solution of cases when news of recent cases was received and rapid intervention might ueip to save a life or at least regularize a detention. Since the extension of its mandate, the Working Group has again made use of this procedure. Reference can be made in this regard to approaches to three Governments concerning a total of some 40 reports of disappearances; it is hoped that the dialogues chus established with them will yield adequate results.
9/ E/CN,4/1983/14, para. 129.

The Working Group has received further information on the impact of a disappearance on the victim's family and in particular on the children. The other chapters of this re^it p^ovlae information on the treatment of the disappeared person himself and a description of the rights oí the victim violated by disappearances is g'iven belox' (chapter VI), but the growing volume of information on the impact of a disappearance on children deserves special consideration. Several recent studies on the subject of children and disappearances, in particular those presented to the Fourth National Symposium of Social Pediatrics in Buenos Aires (Larch 1983), offer a number of observations regarding the family, basecf upon research. The Working Group attempts to; summarize below some of the points expressed. The psychological state of a family after a relative's disappearance can be described as "sustained shock", that is, a latent arid prolonged critical'state characterized by an inconclusive search for the loved-one, anguish, sorrow and incertitude. Children participate directly or indirectly in every moment of the progressive deterioration of the family structure which is marked by fear, injustice, silence and permanent aggression from certain groups of society. Many, changes, occur in family life -is a consequence of the disappearance , such as: lack of economic resources, particularly in modest families which depended upon the missing person's wages; permanent psychological stress, uhich sometimes causes other health problems among members of the family; changes in the use of time, since a good part of it is devoted to the search for the missing person; children are frequently left alone or without assistance (for example: a mother of eight, father disappeared; the mother forgets to take one of her sons to school when he should attend an examination, the child loses his school year); social and legal instability (lack of social and legal protection from governmental institutions).
148, From the point of view of the child, the situation has been described as follows: the child feels unprotected; he does not get a social response to his anguish ("nobody will do unat the child's sense of justice indicates should be done"). He feels that his rights are being violated, even if he cannot describe those rights- This could lead to a rejection of the society, denial of its validity (indifference), denial of the effectiveness of justice and law, which in turn can lead the child to take justice into his own nanas or seek evasion through drugs or alcohol. The child's psychological state can be described as: a feeling of having been abandoned; the syndrome o i the marginalized child; permanent and prolonged stress; the syndrome of the ill-treated child. Many children of disappeared parents present the symptoms of the "syndrome ot abandonment". Features of this syndrome are: repeated infections, alterations in development and psychic disturbances. The feeling of having oeen abandoned is asccompanied by a general state of confusion, which hinders intellectual work such as analyses and syntheses. In the case of the children of missing persons, marginality can appear ar three different levels; (a) marginality within his or her own family; contradictory interpretations of the disappearance and of the phenomenon irself can lead to detachment,' a split within the family, and prolonged separation from persons affectively linked to the chila increases the child's feeling of abandonment; (b) the child's family sometimes imposes a certain "margin£li~y" or isolation, allegedly for the "protection of the child"; and (c) m£.r<*ina] ity is imposed bv official actions and by public and social reaction to the original circumstances surrounding the disappearance, which increases the feeling o£ being different and rejected.

Prolonged and permanent stress is also noted. The child whose parents have been arrested at home or in his presence has suffered terrible stress (anguish, fear, impotence in the face or violence). All the family has frequently been subjected to the same kind of stress and so is not in a position to give assitance to the child. Such acute stress can produce a lasting inhibition. The depth and duration of the stress causes a number of reactions which often result in an attitude of despair. Further, many children whose parents have disappeared show symptoms of the syndrome of the ill-treated child, particularly if they were present vheti their parents were arrested. In these cases, children are reticent, they avoid contacts with adults; they feel in permanent danger and despair (this is easily seen when they are in a doctor's consulting .room) .

In general, fear is the predominant emotion in the life of these children^ It affects all their personal relationships. They feel deep impotence, vulnerability ana insecurity. The psychological process needed to accept the loss of a dear one is blocked and they are in a permanent state of "suspended sorrow". Such children also havг learning problems and motor-physical difficulties, such as loss of previously acquired dexterity in ordinary activities.
VI. SPECIFIC HUMAL RIGHTS DENIED BY ENFORCED OR INVOLUNTARY
DISAPPEARANCES: xHE SPECIaL RIGHTS OF
CHILDREN AND MOTHERS
The Working Group Tishes to remind the Commission of the chapter in its second report,i/ concerning the human rights violated by enforced or involuntary disappearances which is set out below. It was the result of a comprehensive study and is as valid today as it was then,

The information reflected in the present report shows that in instances of enforced or involuntary disappearances a vide range of human rights of the victim himself and of his family may be denied or infringed. These include civil and political rights as well as economic, social ana cultural rights. With regard to the person who is subjected to enforced or involuntary disappearance, the following may be identified as the principal human rights which he is denied:
(a) The right to liberty and security of person.£' This is the principal human right denied by the very fact of enforced or involuntary disappearance. Connected rights, such as the right to freedom from arbitrary arrest,^.' the right to a fair trial in criminal matters^.' and the right to recognition as a person before the law, are all involved;¿/ I/ E/CN.4/1492, chap. V.
2/ See Universal Declaration ot Human Rights, article 3; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, article 9; American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, article I; American Convention on Human Rights, article 7; and European Convention on Human Rights, article 5.
_3/ See Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 9; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, article 9; American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, article XXV; American Convention on Human Rights, article 7; and European Convention on Human Rights, article 5.
4/ See Universal Declaration of Human eights, articles 10 and 11; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, article 14; American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Пап, articles XVIII and XXVI; American Convention on Huuan Rights, article 8; and European Convention on Human Rights, article 6.
5/ See Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article G; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, article i 6; American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man, article XVII; American Convention ou Human Rights, article 3.
(b) The right to humane conditions ot detention ana freeoom from torture, cruel or degrading treatment or punishment .A' Some of the information before the Group aeais vith the conditions of detention, including ill-treatment, suffered by the missing or disappeared persons;
(c) The right to life._L' Some of the information received tjy the Group indicates that during detention the missing or disappeared person may be killed.

Disappearances of the sort under consideration oy the Group also involve infringements of certain of the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners approved by the Economic and Social Council m its resolution O6J С (XXIV) of 31 July ib)57..§/ The following i-ules of a peueraL nature .'re relevant to enforced or involuntary disappearances because under rule 4, they are applicable to all categories of prisoners, criminal or civil, untried or convicted, including prisoners subject" to "security measures"; rule 7, which requires that detailed records shall be icept for each prisoner* rule 37, which ensures that prisoners shall be able to communicate with their family; and rule 44, which requires the authorities to inform a prisoner 1 . spouse or nearest relative in 'the case of his death, or serious illness, and affords the prisoner the right to inform at once his family of his imprisonment or his transfer to another institution. Rule 92, which applies to untried prisoners also recognizes the prisoner's right to communicate with his family and to inform his family immediately of his detention.

If these may be said to oe the principal human rights of the person who suffers enforced or involuntary disappearance, a reading of the Universal Declaration and the International Covenants on Human Rights sho^s that, to a greater or lesser degree, practically all basic human rights of such a person are infringed. Particular concern has been expressed to the Group about the 6/ See Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 5; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, articles 7 ana 10; American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of lian, article XXV; American Convention on Human Rights, article 5; and European Convention on Human Rights, article 3. l_l See Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 3; International Convenant on Civil and Political Rights, article 6; American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, article 1; American ConventLOQ on Human Rights, article 4; and European Convention on Human Rights, article 2.
8/ See United dations publication, Sales No. 5b, IV.4. page 5 5 right to a family lifeZ/ of the persons /ho sufler enforced or involuntary disappearance and, or their relatives. In the case of pregnant women, children and refugees who suffer enforced or involuntary disappearance, their specific rights, as contained in the international human rights instruments, are infringed; for example, the right of overy child to measures of protection.j_2/ A revie" of the economic, social and cultural rights guaranteed by the various international human rights instruments shows that most of them are denied, to <i greater 01 lesser extent, oy enforced or involuntary disappearance s « 155- The information before the b'oup showt, thac various human rights of. the members of the family of a mitsing or disappeared person may also be infringeu by that person's enforced absence. Their right to a tamilv iiie may ue seen as the principal right irvolved, but other rights of an economic, social and cultural nature can also be directly affected; for example, the family's standard of living, health care and education may all be adversely affected by the absence of a parent. The adverse impact of the disappearance of a parent on the mental health of children has been pointed out elsewhere..LL' Finally, Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 nas recogniz^q "the rights of families to knou the fate of their relatives" and this right of relatives to he informed of the whereabouts anu iate of missing or disappeared family members has been reflected J n resolutions of United Mations bodies. ±L>

The /orкing Group has been,particularly concerned about reports of the disappearance of babies and children. There is no doubt that while practices resulting in enforced or involuntary disappearances can under no circumstances be justified or excused, those situations affecclng or involving children are particularly grave anu warrant every attention and concern trom the international community. Instances of the enforced or involuntary disappearance 9/ See Universal Declaration of Kuraaa Rights, articles 12 and 16; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, articles 17 and 23; American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of i-ian, articles V and VI; American Convention on Human Rights, articles 11 and 17; European Convention on Human Rights, articles 8 and 12.
10/ See Universal declaration of human ..ights, article 2.5; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, article 10; American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, article 24; American Convention on Human Rights, article VII; and European Convention on Human Rights, article 19.
11/ See for example, the report o£ the Ad Hoc Working Group on the Situation of Human Rights in Chile to the General Assembly я1_ its thirty-third session (A/33/331), para. 376.
12/ See, for example, CentraL Assembly resolutions 34/179 and 35/188 on the situation of human rights in Chile. of children may not only deny or .¡nrringe some or all of the rights referred to above but, in addition, they may entail breaches of specific principles on children's rights set forth m a number of international instruments, both Of a universal and a regional character, and constitute a direct attack on the family as a social institution. The following paragraphs reflect some of the most significant among those principles.

The right of children, pregnant women and nursing mothers to benefit from special measures of protection, care and assistance has been affirmed in numerous international instruments, among them, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,„/ the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,J_t' the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,±2.' the Declaration of the Rights of the Child, the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man,jLÊ/ the American Convention on Human Rights, 12.' the European Social Charter,JLË/ the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949,±L> the two Protocols to the Geneva Conventions of 1949±2/ and the Declaration on the Protection of Women and Children in Emergency and Armed Conflict adopted by the General Assembly on 14 December 1974. Since part of the information received by the Working Group relates to the disappearance of pregnant women, it should also be recalled that the American Convention on Human Rights states that the right to life shall be protected from the moment of conception,iLi/ and that the application of capital punishment to pregnant women is prohibited by that Convention,±±/ as v;ell as by the International 13/ Article 25, para. 2.
14/ Article 24, para. 1.
15/ Article 10, paras. 2 and 3. lb_/ Article VII.
1_7/ Article 19.
IS_/ Part I, Nos. 7 and 17.
V¿/ Articles 14, 17, 24, 38, para, 5, 50, 76, 89, 91, 94.
20/ Protocol I, article 8 (a) in conjunction with article 10 and articles 70, 76, paras. 1 and 2, and 77, para. 1; and Protocol IT, article 4, para. 3.
21/ Article 4, para. 1.
22/ Article 4} para. 1 .
Covenant on Civil and Political Right s.££/ and by the two Protocols to the Geneva Conventions of 1949.Jz' Some of the reports considered by the Workiag Group appear to reveal that violations of these principles have taken place.

A number of instruments referred to above contain provisions designed to protect the right of the child to his personal identity, which includes the recognition of, and respect for, the status derived from his blood relationships. Thus:
(a) The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides that every child shall be registered immediately after birth and shall have a name,11' and the American Convention further states that every person has the right to the surnames of his parents, or to that of one of them._r£/ These provisions are particularly relevant to those reports which indicate that children have been born to mothers who were in captivity; and,
(b) The Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, as well as the Protocols to the Geneva Conventions, contain detailed provisions aimed at ensuring the identification of children separated from their families as a result of a war. Such provisions include, inter alia: the obligation 'of occupying Powers %o take all necessary steps to facilitate the identification of children and the registration of their parentage^ as well as the prohibition against such Powers from changing the children's persona] status;ZZ' the obligation of the parties to о conflict to establish an official bureau to provide information on the protected persons who are in its power a section of xjnich is responsible for taking the necessary steps to identify children whose identity is in doubt;_£2' the obligation of the parties to a conflict to keep detailed identity records in the case of 23/ Article 6, para. 5.
24/ Article 76, para. 3 of Protocol I and article 6, para. 4 of Protocol II. The latter instrument further makes this provision applicable to mothers of young children.
25/ Article 24, para. 2.
2£>/ Article 18.
27/ Fourth Geneva Convention, article 50.
28/ Fourth Geneva Convention, article 50 in conjunction with article 136. evacuation of children;±L' and the obligation'ot the parties to a contlict to endeavour to arrange for all children under 12 to oe identified by the v?earing of identity discs or uy some other 30/ means ..¿x'

The Group is of the opinion that if the preceding provisions are binding upon States in time of war or armed conflict, the principles on which they are founded should, a fortiori, be respected m time of peace, even if there exists a situation of internal unrest. These principles are particularly relevant to certain reports received by the Group to the effect that small children reportea missing may have had t'heir identities concealed or changed and may have been given for adoption or foster care to persons who would not necessarily know their origin. This was found to be the case in several reports submitted to the Working Group; the real identity of the children was later discovered.

The above instruments also contain provisions designed to protect the right of the child to be physically under the protection and care of his relations. Thus:
(a) The Declaration of the Rights of the Child states that, wherever possible, the child shall groxj up in the care and under the responsibility of his parents, and ados that a child of tender years shall not, save in exceptional circumstances, be separated from his mother; xl'
(b) A number of provisions of the above-cited Geneva Convention and the Protocols deal with the question of family unity and set forth the right of children not to be separated from their families, even in cases of internment. These instruments further contain specific provisions concerning the reunification of families dispersed as a result of armed conflicts._i£/

ihis is a formidable list of provisions, and the Working Group feels it necessary to draw attention to the principles thus internationally agreed, and their relevance to the reports on disappearances of children.
29/ Protocol I, article 78, para. 3.
30/ Fourth Geneva Convention, article 24.
31/ Principle 6.
32/ Fourth Geneva Convention, articles 26 a-\ü 22; Protocol I, articles 74 and 75, para. 5, and Protoco] II, article 4, para. 3(b).

Since its inception, the Working Group has given attention to the bodies established at the national level to investigate reports of enforced or involuntary disappearances.I/ This was a matter already taken up by the Ad Hoc Working Group on the,Situation of Human Rights in Chile and the Expert on the Question ,of the Fate of Missing and Disappeared Persons in Chile.2J Recently, the importance of such bodies was stressed to the Group by the Latin American Federation of Associations for Relatives of Disappeared-Detainees (FEDEFAM) in a document presented to the Working group in June 1983. That document referred to such bodies in El Salvador and Bolivia; the Working Group has itself referred to those and to one in Sri Lanka.

The Government of El Salvador, by Decree lío. 9 of 6 November 1979, established a Special Commission to Investigate Political Prisoners and Disappearances for the purpose of carrying out on-the-spot investigations to determine the fate of the persons registered in the country as having disappeared since 1972., This Special Commission was set up in response to a recommendation of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights after a visit to El Salvador in 1978. The Special Commission was composed of three members and adopted two reports, an interim report dated 23 November 1979 and the final report dated 3 January 1983. The Commission published a list of persons detained by the public forces who had disappeared, but said that they were not the only detainees to have disappeared; while none of the disappeared were found alive there was proof of the capture or detention of many of them by the security forces. The Commission had visited cemeteries or burial sites and discovered bodies, some of which were identified as missing persons. The Commission visited detention centres of the various public forces and found places which co'uid have served as secret prisons. It recommended that those places b'e modified so that they could not be used as secret places of detention, that the persons identified as responsible for the disappearances be tried and that the families be given compensation. The Working Group sought information from the Government on the implementation of these recommendations, out has received none. Non-governmental organizations have reported to the Group that the recommendations have not been implemented.

In Bolivia, a National Commission for the Investigation of Disappeared Persons -was established by Supreme Decree No. 19.241 of 28 October 1982. The Commission is composed cf representatives of the Executive Power, the Human Rights Commissions of both houses of the Legislative Assembly, the Church, the armed forces, the trade unions, the Permanent Assembly of Human Rights, the Red Cross and the press. Its objects are to analyse, investigate and determine the 1_/ E/CN.4/1435, paras. 33 and 91-92; E/CN.4/1492, paras. 73-75, 138-139, 183 and annex X; E/CN.4/1492/Add.1, para. 6; E/CN.4/1983/14, paras. 40, 128 and 145.
2/ A/33/331, paras. 421-422 and 779 (15); E/CN.4/1310, para. 335; A/34/583/Add.l, para. 197. situation concerning disappeared persons, T'ith full access to all relevant iniormation and the right to seek the assistance of all public authorities; it can also set up District Committees. It i s accessible to anyone with a complaint about the disappearance of a person in Bolivia.

During a meeting with the Working Group in June 1983, a representative of the Latin American Federation of Associations for Relatives of Disappeared-Detainees vFEDEFA^) referred со the bolivian National Commission for the Investigation of Disappeared Persons and provided the forking Group with a copy of that Commission's work plan tor the one year period beginning on 1 February 3 983. The Working Group was informed that the relatives of the disappeared participated actively m the plan* Оa the one hand, the Commission was concentrating on the investigation of cases and the opening of criminal pioceedings against: those responsible. On the other hand, it was hoped that the Penal Code could be amended to include the definition of the crime of enforced disappearance, the type of penal sanction, the constituting elements of the crime and wa'ys of participating in it, since enforced disappearances were to be considered a crime against humanity. The plan provides for action on many otner aspects of the problem, such as establishing mechanisms for, and centres of, investigation, informing public opinion on the problem and holding a national conference in order to evaluate the progress made. The representative of FEDEFA-i also stated to the Wording Group that the results of the bolivian Commission to date had been encouraging. Since the Commission was established there have been no new cases registered and people feel secure that they will not become a victim to the practice. Progress has been made towards solving many long-standing cases. Some bodies have been identified and recovered. There are, according *~o the families, many obstacles to be overcome, but they are hopeful and optimistic. It was suggested by FEDEFAh that the Commission could be used as a model lor other situations.

The Working Group was informed in 1981 by a non-governmental organization in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the establishment in Sri Lanka, in the second half of 1979, of a Parliamentary Select Committee under the Chairmanship of the Sri Lankan Minister of Trade for the purpose of investigating certain events which had occurred m July 1979 in the northern part ot that country. Among the events to be investigated was the reported disappearance of three persons. In a letter dated 9 August 1983 the Permanent Representative of Sri Lanka to the United Nations Office at Geneva transmitted a copy of the report of the Select Committee. That Coaindttee had been established by Parliament on 8 August 1979 and its five members were appointed by the Speaker on 20 August 1979. The Committee's powers included that of summoning any person to appear before it, requiring any person to produce any document or record, procuring and receiving all such evidence, written or oral, as the Committee might think necessary or desirable and carrying out any action necessary for the fullest consideration of the matters referred to it. The Committee began its work on 10 September 1979 and held 34 meetings. It visited the north of Sri Lanka and, during its meetings, heard testimony from a large number of people, including members of Parliament, senior police officials, senior army officers, medical personnel, police oflicers, prisoners, and the relatives of disappeared persons. The Committee's report contained considerable information on the arrest of, among others, the three missing persons and their eventual fate. With regard to two of the missing persons, the Committee stated that there was a great deal of evidence suggesting that they had been taken to a particular police station and that the weight of the evidence would at least
E/CiM.¿+/1984/21
demand a further investigation; it recommended that a separate team of special investigators be appointed for that purpose. With regard to the third person, the Committee made no specific finding or recommendations.

A representative of the Latin American Federation of Associations for Relatives of Disappeared-Detaineees (FEDEFAh) in a meeting with the Working Group underlined the importance his organization attached to co-ordinated national action against disappearances; this included independent anc exhaustive investigations of the individual cases; effective prosecution of those responsible; legislative reforms to deal adequately with the crime; the physical elimination of all places in military or police establishments wnich could serve as secret detention centres, and public opinion campaigns to create awareness. It was suggested that three tests be applied to national investigative bodies to determine whether they were impartial and whether exhaustive investigations were made; (a) the independence of the person or body charged witn the investigation; was it dependent upon the Executive, the military or security forces? Was it a judicial body and had the juaiciary investigated cases presented in the past? Was it a Parliamentary body? (b) The investigative powers of the body; could it freely visit possible centres ot detention anu investigate clandestine cemeteries, or did it simply register cases and transmit information from the Government? (c) The results achieved; were any concrete results obtained for the families giving necessary details? Were judicial proceedings initiated when illegal activities were uncovered? It was recommended that the United Nations promote the establishment of such bodies in countries where disappearances were reported.

The Working Group has also been informed of the existence of other domestic investigative commissions or bodies set up to inquire into issues including disappearances; it is proposed further to study the results of their work. Examples are to be found in Chapter II sections H and К on Lebanon and Uruguay.

This fourth report by the Working G-oup shows the extent to which enforced or involuntary disappearances continue, [t also demonstrates that progress is slow in revealing solution^ t,iuc<_ th^ phciiomcaca ^ eljsely related to internal political instability. Where this has oeen halted, new cases of disappearances are rare. Where such internal conflict continues, disappearances remain common features of the overall situation.
170* Success in clarifying cases which occurred m che past has so far been very slight; it is evident that any progress is dependent on the policies of the Government concerned. These policies are only incidental to the Group*ь activities, since solutions alone, and not politics, are the Group's objective. Where disappearances are continuing, the attitude of the Governments concerned varies. Some have established domestic institutions or procedures which have been more or Jess successful in resolving the fate of disappeared persons. ihe international community should applaud efficient initiatives of this kind. In other cases there seems to be a lamentable drift towards toleration of these cases, combined with a marked difficulty in solving them.

In countries where disappearances continue, there is no set pattern which can be detected. It is far from certain tnat the Group possesses a comprehensive list of persons who have disappeared, with the attendant circumstances. The ability of families or organizations to give such details to the Group varies, ana with it the extent of the allegations available to the Group. On the other hand, Governments have adopted widely differing procedures by way of response. Some nave developed a technique which brings regular responses, as reflected in the statistics quoted earlier in the report. Others, unfortunately, make no response at ^11, or appear reluctant to give any explanations.

Readers of this report should have no doubt concerning the Group's evaluation of enforced or involuntary disappearances. Its view is that they constitute one of the most pernicious techniques > ro; the violation of human rights; the evidence presented to the Group shows its devastating impact on the victim, the overwhelming consequences for the tamily and its paralyzing effect on society where fear prevents the action needed to bring disappearances to an end. Enforced or involuntary disappearances violate practically all the human rights of the victim and many of the rights of his family; the practice is contrary to the Geneva Conventions of 194V and no special circumstances, armed conflict, states of emergency, situations of internal conflict or tension can justify enforced or involuntary disappearances. It is such a serious violation that many have suggested it should receive the highest level of international sanction. It has been clearly decided by tne international community that the relatives of missing persons have a right to know their whereabouts or fate; this can only mean effective investigations into each case.

As the Group said in 1981 the only course of action is to persuade and motivate Governments to prevent, eradicate or investigate such incidents which may have occurred within their territory. Public opinion, both national and international, has a part to play (see the Group's report to tne Commission at its thirty-eighth session.^/). However, all sectors of society have a role in 1/ E/CN.4/1492, para. 176. preventing disappearances or bringing them to a halt. ihc occurrence of government-connected disppearances is a sign oi the breakdown not only of the security or police services directly responsible, but also of the judiciary ana executive in their responsibility for ensuring respect for law and order. Each arm of government has a role to play in preventing or ending disappearances. Also, an important part can be played by the press and,human rights and religious organizations; their silence can allow the practice to d-evelop and take root or their opposition can help prevent or end disappearances. Their activities deserve the support and protection of the international community. The Working Group has received many reports of the harrasment, death or disappearance of journalists, lawyers and relatives who actively opposed disappearances.

Effective international action against disappearances depends in large measure on the attitude of Governments towards this phenomenon and the degree to which they co-operate m ^radicating it. However, the mobilization or strengthening of public opinion, and the support given to organizations compaigning for a solution, can also make their contribution. The report shows examples of a response by certain Governments which has led to resolution of some cases, and promises r similar result tor others. elsewhere, the Government's response, by comparison with the details of the allegations supplied, makes it difficult to believe that any real investigation has taken place. There is also a difference in the extent to which national organizations concerned with human rights are at liberty со operate and to provide information to the international community. It is necessary to add that the international community should attempt to check Lhe allegations it receives, since, regrettably, the motivation of its informants is not always purely humanitarian.

Lt vill Se apparent from the previous chapters that the Working Group continues to be confronted with two sorts of case. There are those from the past, occurring in the 1970s or even earlier, often predating the Government now in office. Others are current, arising day by day during 1983 as in earlier years of the Group's activity. The distinction makes little difference to the families of those concerned. All the evidence suggests that the uncertainty, anxiety, anguish and frustration is as great whether the disappearance occurred 10 years or 10 days ago.

However, from the Wording Group's viewpoint, different techniques and objectives must be recognized, according to national circumstances. Older cases suffer from the problem of the passage of time i/hicn makes investigation increasingly difficult. By contrast Governments may be less sensitive about enquiring inte events which happened berore their ¿accession Co power than into those which occurred during their own tenure of office. The essential basis of the Group's inquiries has been explained, not only m previous reports, but also in all approaches to Governments with which it has been in contact; no accusations are involved, no confessions or self-incriminations are sought. The critical fact is that only a Government has the resources which can help to solve the cases. So long as the exercise is recognized as being entirely humanitarian, neither responsibility for a disappearance nor the question of punishment enters in the Working Group'a consideration. This point has been repeated again ?nd again. The Group's reports show that the policy has been borne out in practice. Reactions in the Commission's debates and governmental responses show that this strict and consistent approach is being increasingly recognized and relied upon. It is at present the Working Group's main source of strength, backed as it is by successive consensus approval of its actions over nearly four years in all United Nations forums.

The Group, therefore, believes that the time may have arrived for the Commission to adopt a more active role than hitherto. Experience shows that the points made in General Assembly resolution 33/173 are still valid and provide a framework for the Group's activities and for an assessment of its achievements. >That may now be desiraule is a firmer appeal by the Commission to the Governments concerned to increase their co-operation with the Group, including ¿he encouragement of a positive response to the Group's suggestions for cîj-the-spot visits. The Group is aware of the unique nature of each situation and takes that fully into account in its work.

In previous reports the Working Group has suggested that no fundamental or philosophical phenomenon underlies the appalling practice of enforced or involuntary disappearances. It is merely an effective, though short-term, method of eliminating political opponents and preventing family members or the courts from securing an immediate remedy. However, the disappeared have families, who increasingly unite in their common frustration and despair. The longer--term repercussions have not even now been fully assessed, and may well be TTiVch more serious than currently anticipated.

The inhumanity and specific violations of accepted human rights arising out of disappearances have been catalogued in previous reports. Nothing has emerged this year to reduce the seriousness of those affronts to human life and o^îiicy. In addition to recommendations made in previous reports, the Working G"oup recommends that:
(a) The problem of enforced or involuntary disappearances should continue to be a major concern of the Commission, and should attract the attention of the entire international community, including that of non-governmental organizations;
(b) This concern should again be expressed as humanitarian in character, wholly devoid of political or accusatorial content;
(c) The Commission should reinforce the w'orking Group's approach, which calls for the goodwill and co-operation of Governments in solutions to cases;
(d) The Commission should urge upon Governments the need to adopt measures, in dealing with internal censions or disorders from any quarter, which will Inform relatives of the detention and subsequent trial of м:у а'с 'SPv J person.

At the last meeting of its twelfth session on 9 December 1933, the present report was adopted and signed by the members of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances:
Viscount Colville of Culross (United Kingdom) Chairman/Rapporteur
Jonas K.D. Foli (Ghana)
Agha Hilaly (Pakistan)
Ivan Tosevski (Yugoslavia)