A/HRC/7/4 page 9 3. Government reactions to Opinions 8. In a letter dated 21 May 2007, the Permanent Representative of Viet Nam to the United Nations Office at Geneva reacted to Opinion No. 13/2007 (Viet Nam) concerning the detention of Mr. Pham Hong Son. According to the communication, Pham Hong Son violated Vietnamese laws. He was arrested and brought to trial in due process of law and according to international human rights standards. His trial was open and fair and the sentence of the Court was completely judicious. During his detention, Pham Hong Son was treated on an equal basis to all other inmates, having access to the same nutritional regime and medical care. In no case did he fall sick in prison without receiving adequate treatment. He refused an operation for his inguinal hernia and considered that, in his capacity as a medical doctor, he could cure himself. The President of Viet Nam, implementing humanitarian and tolerant policy of the State, granted him a special amnesty in August 2006. 9. In a letter dated 23 July 2007, the Permanent Representative of the United States of America to the United Nations Office at Geneva, reacted to Opinion No. 33/2006 (Iraq/United States of America), particularly its paragraphs 9 and 15, concerning Mr. Tariq Aziz. The communication points out that the United States is not aware of any complaint made by Mr. Aziz or his lawyers regarding a lack of privacy or denial of access. Mr. Aziz’s meetings with his lawyers are completely private. There are no guards or United States personnel present in these meetings. Likewise, Mr. Aziz and his counsel are free to pass documents, with the only restriction that they are screened by a non-interested party to ensure they do not affect security matters at the detention facility. There has never been a time that a request for a private visit with Mr. Aziz has been denied. A qualified defence attorney has visited Mr. Aziz four times over the last two months (i.e. May and June 2007) and another visit was scheduled for the following week. 10. The communication also notes the long-standing position of the United States that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) does not apply to conduct by the United States Government outside the territory of the United States. Mr. Aziz is being held pending trial by the Iraqi High Tribunal, pursuant to arrangements made between Multi-National Force - Iraq and the Iraqi Ministry of Justice. He awaits adjudication of his case. 11. In relation to this observation the Working Group notes that the Human Rights Committee, which monitors implementation of the Covenant, has clarified that “a State party must respect and ensure the rights laid down in the Covenant to anyone within the power or effective control of that State party, even if not situated within the territory of the State party”.2 Similarly, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in its advisory opinion on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territories3 recognized that the jurisdiction of States is primarily territorial, but concluded that the ICCPR extends to “acts done by a State in 2 Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 31 (2004) on the Nature of the General Legal Obligation Imposed on States Parties to the Covenant, para. 10. 3 International Court of Justice, Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Advisory Opinion of 9 July 2004.