- 10 - Article 4 (Comment on List of Issue 15) 29. Torture is prohibited based on the penal law in Indonesia. Besides prohibited by the penal law, torture and other cruel punishment are also against Pancasila, the state ideology, and also the constitution of the Indonesian Republic. The Law 39/1999 about Human Rights also guarantees the right to be free of torture. This law also defines torture somewhat similar with the one in the Convention against Torture (CAT). 30. The prohibition of the act of torture conducted by public officials is stated in the penal law Article 442, which says: “A public official in a penal case, who uses the means of force to obtain confession or information, is penalized with four years imprisonment.” The prohibition of torture in Article 442 uses the definition which is close to the one defined in CAT, even though it is not sufficient enough. This is because it has not covered the act of “instigation” or “consent” or “acquiescence” from public officials or person acting in an official capacity. 31. In order to cope with this limitation, at the moment the Draft Law of the Penal Code that prohibits torture as stated in CAT is being prepared. In the Draft Law, Article 300 states “every public official by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other persons acting in an official capacity inflicting pain or suffering both mentally and physically for such purposes as obtaining from her/him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him will be sentenced for 3 years minimum or 12 years maximum imprisonment”. Article 11 (Comment on List of Issue 24) 32. The monitoring of places of detention, especially Correctional Institutions (Lapas) and State Detention Place (Rutan), is conducted by the Human Rights Commission of Indonesia (Komnas HAM) as a part of its monitoring function. This monitoring was done from April to May 2007, in several Lapas and Rutan in Indonesia, which were located in South Sulawesi, North Sulawesi and Riau. 33. In South Sulawesi, the monitored Lapas and Rutan were Lapas Maros, Rutan Pangkajene, and Lapas and also Rutan Makasar. Meanwhile, in North Sulawesi, it was Lapas Manado. In Riau, there were Lapas Bangkinang, Lapas Pekanbaru, and Lapas Tanjung Pinang. 34. Komnas HAM has not yet conducted the specific monitoring as suggested in Article 11 of the Convention against Torture (CAT) that obliged the State to do these steps: “to monitor systematically the rules about interrogation, instruction, method, habits and also rules to arrest someone or the treatment for those who got arrested, detained or imprisoned in each jurisdiction area in order to avoid torture cases.” The monitoring to act upon Article 11 has not been effectively carried out by Komnas HAM. 35. From the monitoring of these detention places, either Lapas or Rutan, Komnas HAM noted several conditions: (a) The number occupants were exceeding the capacity of the Lapas or Rutan and this has caused the condition of the facilities to be quite dreadful;