impunity for police/ security and military personnel. In that connection, the measures that have been taken do not seem to be sufficient to guarantee that all members of the armed forces who abuse their power and violate citizens' rights will be brought to trial and punished. Military courts do not seem to be the most appropriate ones for the protection of citizens' rights in a context where the military itself has violated such rights. The persistence of paramilitary groups also causes concern. Furthermore, the Committee is of the opinion that full guarantees do not exist for adequate implementation of the provisions of article 4 of the Covenant regarding states of emergency. The Committee also notes with concern that the principle of equal pay for men and women has not yet been fully applied in Colombia. The child labour issue is also a matter that violates the Covenant. 4. Suggestions and recommendations 394. The Committee recommends that the State party should intensify its action against all violence resulting in human rights violations. It should eliminate impunity; strengthen safeguards for individuals vis-a-vis the armed forces? limit the competence of the military courts to internal issues of discipline and similar matters so that violations of citizens' rights will fall under the competence of ordinary courts of law; and disband all paramilitary groups. The Committee also urges the State party to deal more effectively with problems relating to child labour. Finally, the Committee calls for bringing emergency legislation into conformity with article 4 of the Covenant. BELGIUM 395. The Committee considered the second periodic report of Belgium (CCPR/C/57/Acld.3) at its 1142nd and 1143rd meetings, held on 7 April 1992 (CCPR/C/SR.1142 and SR.1143). (For the composition of the delegation, see annex VIII.) 396. The report was introduced by the representative of the State party, who noted that the Covenant had become part of Belgium's internal law after it had been approved by the Parliament in 1981 and ratified by the Crown in 1983. Under Belgian law, it was for a court to decide whether a treaty provision was directly applicable. In 1971 the Court of Cassation of Belgium had affirmed the primacy of the provisions of international treaties over national laws. A Belgian court might therefore apply national provisions only if they were compatible with those of international treaties directly applicable in internal law. In 1984 the Court of Cassation of Belgium had also affirmed that article 9, paragraph 2, of the Covenant had direct effects in internal law for individuals and, since then, the Court had confirmed such direct applicability in the case of other provisions of the Covenant. Constitutional and legal framework within which the Covenant is implemented 397. With reference to that issue, members of the Committee wished to know what the status was of provisions of the Covenant that were not directly applicable and those, other than article 9, paragraph 2, of the Covenant, which had been interpreted by the Court to be directly applicable; to what -94-