Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 17
Paragraph
Paragraph text
History and science offer no body of data on the strategic effectiveness of harsh questioning techniques. The popular belief that torture is an effective way of discovering the truth - or more effective than non-coercive interviewing methods - is perpetuated by misleading depictions in popular media. The use of torture and ill treatment has in fact long been associated with high risks of obtaining false confessions and unreliable information. It is well established that victims will say anything - regardless of whether it is true - to appease their tormentors and make the pain stop (see European Court of Human Rights, Othman (Abu Qatada) v. the United Kingdom). It follows that the perpetrators cannot reliably assess whether information elicited through mistreatment - if any - is truthful, false or complete. Research on lie detection reveals that trained interviewers can differentiate fabrications from truths at a rate only slightly better than chance (slightly above 50 per cent). Those employing torture and ill-treatment during interviews tend to misread victims and fail to recognize the truth, often perpetuating a vicious cycle of mistreatment and fabrications.
Legal status
Non-negotiated soft law
Body
Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment