A/HRC/17/41 and, if adopted as drafted, will not seriously address the issue of the lack of independence and effectiveness of this institution. (b) Penitentiary system 40. As described in the monitoring report published in February 2011 by the Public Oversight Council, which has functioned under the State Penitentiary Service since 2007, a number of serious problems persist in the penitentiary sphere. These include poor prison conditions, insufficient budgetary allocations to the penitentiary system, lack of trained medical staff and psychologists, and weak social security for staff members of the penitentiary system. The legislative framework regulating the penitentiary system and the execution of punishments requires serious improvements. 41. Serious concerns relating to life-sentenced prisoners deserve attention, in particular the application of this type of punishment by the judiciary in relation to defendants in criminal cases relating to the June 2010 violence in the south. As of February 2011, there were 242 persons sentenced to life imprisonment. The most pressing issues relating to life imprisonment are: a need to replace life imprisonment with 25 years of deprivation of liberty as a fixed punishment; a need to review legal norms that discriminate against life prisoners vis-à-vis other types of prisoners, including in their right to be considered for parole; and the need to build additional facilities for life prisoners. The Government is currently elaborating a national programme (“Umyt II”) for 2011-2015 to replace the previous programme that expired in 2010, which will set out a conceptual framework for developing the penitentiary system. (c) Truth and accountability 42. The Government has taken some steps to investigate the causes of the June 2010 inter-ethnic violence. 43. On 11 January 2011, the National Commission of Inquiry established by President Otunbaeva in July 2010 presented its report. According to the Commission, the violence was instigated by ethnic Uzbek community leaders and supporters of former president Bakiyev. The Commission states that members of the provincial government and the security forces failed to respond promptly and prevent the violence. The Commission also found that members of law enforcement tortured detainees, most of whom were ethnic Uzbeks. 44. On 13 January 2011, the Ombudsman of Kyrgyzstan presented his report on his investigation into the June events, stating that his office supports the conclusions of the National Commission of Inquiry, in particular that the conflict was initiated by ethnic Uzbek provocateurs. According to the conclusion of the Ombudsman’s investigation, the conflict was due to the socio-economic situation in the southern region that originated in the Soviet time, when ethnic Uzbeks enjoyed better living standards than ethnic Kyrgyz. 45. There have been concerns about the lack of independence and impartiality of both investigations. At least three members of civil society, who were among members of the National Commission of Inquiry, expressed concerns about the modalities, composition and the terms of reference of the National Commission. Both reports largely reflected views held among some ethnic Kyrgyz politicians and the majority of the public. Debates in Parliament on the findings of the National Commission were characterized by numerous provocative nationalistic statements and biased remarks regarding the role of ethnic Uzbeks in the violence. In January 2011, Parliament established a commission to look into the June 2010 inter-ethnic violence. No date is yet set for the publication of its report. 46. The Government also mandated an independent international commission of inquiry (Kyrgyzstan Inquiry Commission) to investigate the circumstances of the June violence, 9