Search Tips
sorted by
300 shown of 1232 entities
Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment Report of the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Year
- 2021
- Document code
- A/HRC/49/50
- Date modified
- Jan 19, 2024
Document
Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Year
- 2021
- Document code
- A/HRC/46/26
- Date modified
- Jan 19, 2024
Document
Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment - Report of the Special Rapporteur
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Year
- 2019
- Document code
- A/HRC/40/59
- Date modified
- Jan 19, 2024
Document
Report of the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Year
- 2018
- Document code
- A/HRC/37/50
- Date modified
- Jan 19, 2024
Document
Seventieth anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: reaffirming and strengthening the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment*
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Legal status
- Non-negotiated soft law
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Year
- 2018
- Document code
- A/73/207
- Date modified
- Jan 19, 2024
Document
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 45
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur has noted that inappropriate conditions of detention, including conditions characterized by structural deprivation and the non-fulfilment of rights necessary for a humane and dignified existence, amount to a systematic practice of inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (E/CN.4/2004/56, para. 41, and A/HRC/13/39/Add.5, para. 230). A considerable amount of jurisprudence at the international and regional levels has also consistently found that conditions of detention can amount to inhuman and degrading treatment. Overcrowding, lack of ventilation, poor sanitary conditions, prolonged isolation, the holding of suspects incommunicado, frequent transfers from one prison to another, the non-separation of different categories of prisoners, the holding of persons with disabilities in environments that include areas inaccessible to them and the holding of persons without means of communication could constitute or lead to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or torture. The Rules could benefit from adhering to the requirement established by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights regarding services in places of detention (see general comment No. 19 of the Committee, especially paras. 1, 9, 31 and 46).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Water & Sanitation
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 60
- Paragraph text
- There is a pressing need to step up the overall involvement of forensic medical science across the various sectors of the criminal justice cycle, and where persons are at particular risk, including administrative, pretrial and juvenile detention and psychiatric institutions. If police officers, prison wardens, hospital administrators, prosecutors and judges were under a legal obligation to request proper forensic medical examinations as a standard procedure whenever there are suspicions or allegations of torture or other ill-treatment, victims would be in a considerably stronger position. In addition to their role in prosecution, forensic medical services can also play a transforming role in prevention. As required in the Body of Principles and expanded in the standard-setting Istanbul Protocol, routine medical examinations of detainees after admission to every place of detention create a system of "checkpoints" that minimizes the number of unaccounted cases of torture and renders impossible a shifting of blame and accountability among various detention facilities and authorities.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 48
- Paragraph text
- The investigative interviewing model comprises a number of essential elements that are key to the prevention of mistreatment and coercion and help to guarantee effectiveness. Interviewers must, in particular, seek to obtain accurate and reliable information in the pursuit of truth; gather all available evidence pertinent to a case before beginning interviews; prepare and plan interviews based on that evidence; maintain a professional, fair and respectful attitude during questioning; establish and maintain a rapport with the interviewee; allow the interviewee to give his or her free and uninterrupted account of the events; use open-ended questions and active listening; scrutinize the interviewee's account and analyse the information obtained against previously available information or evidence; and evaluate each interview with a view to learning and developing additional skills. The remainder of the present section provides an overview of some of these elements, on which the protocol should provide detailed guidance.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 86e
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to conditions during detention, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To prohibit corporal punishment;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 86b
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to conditions during detention, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To consider case-by-case assessment to decide whether it is appropriate for a particular inmate to be transferred to an adult institution after reaching the age of majority;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment 2016, para. 72d
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to abuses in health-care settings, the Special Rapporteur calls upon States to:] Guarantee immediate and unconditional treatment of persons seeking emergency medical care, including as a result of illegal abortion;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Health
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment 2016, para. 72c
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to abuses in health-care settings, the Special Rapporteur calls upon States to:] Set forth clear guidance on implementing domestic abortion legislation and ensure that it is interpreted broadly; and monitor the practical implementation of legislation to ensure that persons are provided the right to legal services in practice;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
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 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.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Violence
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 57
- Paragraph text
- The training of interviewers encompasses several components, beginning with effective training in international human rights law, including the prohibition of torture, ill-treatment and other form of duress; where applicable, training on the Geneva Conventions should also be provided. Training should include but not be limited to theoretical knowledge about international and national standards and guidelines relating to questioning, in addition to practical information, preparation and practice in the steps of investigative interviews and exercises designed to facilitate skills development. The use of scenario-based exercises and the recording and review of interviews constitute best practices in this respect. References to empirical and scientific evidence on the unreliability and counterproductiveness of torture and coercion will also help to effect the needed change in mindsets and interviewing culture. Underlining the adverse impact of mistreatment on memory retrieval would be especially beneficial. Training should also include awareness-raising activities on effective protection of and adaptation to the specific needs of vulnerable persons.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 24
- Paragraph text
- Noting the growing attention to and momentum around the issues of investigation, questioning and custody practices at the international, regional and national levels (see Human Rights Council resolution 31/31), the Special Rapporteur identifies an auspicious opportunity to promote the development of much-needed standards and guidelines on these fundamental practices, with the aim of assisting States to meet their fundamental legal obligations to prohibit and prevent torture and ill-treatment. He takes particular note of the successful recent revisions of the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (now known as the Nelson Mandela Rules) and the Model Protocol for a Legal Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions (Minnesota Protocol) and suggests the organization of a broad public consultation by States and other relevant stakeholders to engage in dialogue on the development of a universal protocol for interviews that is grounded in fundamental principles of international human rights law, including the prohibition of torture, ill-treatment and coercion.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment from an extraterritorial perspective 2015, para. 19
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur contends that the excessive use of force by State agents extraterritorially, resulting in loss of life or injury that meets the threshold for torture or other ill-treatment but occurs in the absence of direct physical control over an individual in the form of custody or detention, must also qualify as constituting authority and control by States (European Court of Human Rights, Andreou v. Turkey). It is imperative that States not be permitted to evade their fundamental obligations on the basis of a spurious distinction based on whether a State exercised direct physical control over an individual before committing the injurious act. In this context, the Special Rapporteur welcomes the judgement of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in Alejandre v. Cuba finding the State responsible for the shooting down of two civilian aeroplanes flying in international airspace. He likewise welcomes the finding of the European Court in Jaloud v. The Netherlands that the State breached its procedural obligations to investigate the killing of Mr. Jaloud and the pronouncement that the shooting of a vehicle passing a checkpoint in Iraq constituted an exercise of jurisdiction "for the purpose of asserting authority and control over persons passing through the checkpoint".
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 32
- Paragraph text
- During country visits, the Special Rapporteur observed that especially allegations of torture in police custody are extremely difficult for the victim to substantiate if he or she has been isolated from the outside world, without access to doctors, lawyers, family or friends who could provide support and assemble or access the necessary evidence. In a number of States there are no routine medical examinations by qualified medical doctors at the police investigation stage, by court order or upon admission to prison, as required in the Body of Principles and expanded upon in the Istanbul Protocol. He also observed that records of medical examinations upon arrest or transfer are often non-existent and recourse to forensic expertise is at the discretion of the police, prison guard, prosecutor or judge and is usually denied. Private forensic examinations are simply unavailable to most detainees for lack of resources or because competent private expertise is non-existent in the community. In addition, modern forensic tests that could corroborate the victims' reports and secure evidence are almost never available. Fear of reprisals against themselves or their families often leads victims of torture to deny or hide this reality. It is therefore important to address the disadvantage in which torture victims find themselves, in the light of the traumatizing experience of torture and the isolation experienced in police custody or prison settings.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 88e
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur calls upon all States to:] Endeavour to reduce pretrial detention and undertake comprehensive justice reforms with a view to enhance the use of alternatives to pretrial detention and custodial sentences;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 21
- Paragraph text
- Since their adoption in 1955, the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners have retained considerable weight as an authoritative set of generally accepted principles and practices for the treatment of prisoners and the management of penitentiary institutions. Even though some provisions are now dated, the Rules continue to be vital and are considered to be among the most important soft-law instruments for the interpretation of various aspects of the rights of prisoners.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 24
- Paragraph text
- In paragraph 10 of its resolution 65/230, the General Assembly requested the Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice to establish an open-ended intergovernmental expert group to exchange information on best practices and on the revision of existing United Nations standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners so that they reflect recent advances in correctional science.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 42
- Paragraph text
- In certain selected cases it can be necessary to conduct a computerized tomography (CT)-scan if there have been head concussions or other internal injuries. However, a thorough neurological examination can be sufficient and body CT-scans are only necessary in very severe cases and in connection with intensive care or with autopsies. CT-scanning is also available in most countries and not very costly. The only test that might not be available in some countries is electromyography (EMG), to diagnose neurological damage in the peripheral nervous system (e.g., paralysis secondary to trauma). The Special Rapporteur notes that this test is also not expensive, but it requires a neurologist or neurophysiologist to conduct and interpret the results. Properly trained personnel may be in short supply. Finally, bone scintigraphy (bone-scan), a modified X-ray test for the diagnosis of fractures that are invisible in traditional X-ray images, requires the injection of contrast in the wounded bone. This test is indicated almost exclusively in the case of the torture method known as "falanga" and is neither difficult to conduct nor expensive. However, the test seems to be unavailable in a number of countries. In cases of sexual abuse, DNA detection may be required. The diagnosis of electrical lesions is also possible and methods do exist.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Commissions of inquiry 2012, para. 41
- Paragraph text
- Several contemporary national commissions of inquiry have been established to examine issues concerning State secrets and complicity in torture in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001. Two such commissions of inquiry are the Detainee Inquiry in the United Kingdom (commonly known as the Gibson Inquiry) and the Commission of Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials in Relation to Maher Arar, in Canada (also referred to as the Arar Commission).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Violence
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 101
- Paragraph text
- Medical personnel should additionally inspect the physical conditions of the inmate's confinement in accordance with article 26 of the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners. Relevant considerations include the level of hygiene and cleanliness of the facility and the inmate, heating, lighting and ventilation of the cell, suitability of clothing and bedding, adequate supply of food and water and observance of the rules concerning physical exercise.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Health
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 45
- Paragraph text
- States also use solitary confinement to isolate individuals during pre-charge or pretrial detention. In some States, such as Denmark, holding individuals in solitary confinement is a regular feature of pretrial detention (A/63/175, para. 78 (i)). The purposes for the use of solitary confinement in pre-charge and pretrial detention vary widely, and include preventing the intermingling of detainees to avoid demoralization and collusion, and to apply pressure on detainees to elicit cooperation or extract a confession.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 85
- Paragraph text
- States should take necessary steps to put an end to the practice of solitary confinement in pretrial detention. The use of solitary confinement as an extortion technique during pretrial detention should be abolished. States should adopt effective measures at the pretrial stage to improve the efficiency of investigation and introduce alternative control measures in order to segregate individuals, protect ongoing investigations, and avoid detainee collusion.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Overview of main observations of five years fact-finding and research 2010, para. 77f
- Paragraph text
- [In building upon the general recommendations elaborated by his distinguished predecessor, Theo van Boven, in 2003, the Special Rapporteur wishes to particularly stress the following recommendations:] In the fight against terrorism and other forms of organized crime, States should keep in mind the absolute and non-derogable nature of the prohibition of torture. In particular, detention in secret places of detention, the expulsion or "rendition" of terrorist suspects to countries known for their practice of torture, the use of diplomatic assurances from these Governments not to torture as a means of circumventing the principle of non-refoulement, "enhanced interrogation techniques" aimed at inflicting severe physical or mental pain or suffering on detainees for the purpose of extracting intelligence information and similar practices in the global fight against terrorism are absolutely prohibited under international law and shall immediately be terminated. After all, torture, as the ultimate form of power exercised by one individual over another individual in a powerless situation, constitutes a direct attack on the personal integrity, dignity and humanity of human beings and is, therefore, for sound philosophical and historical reasons, absolutely prohibited under international law even in the most extreme and exceptional circumstances, such as war or terrorism.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Year
- 2010
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 42
- Paragraph text
- Of all the countries visited by the Special Rapporteur, only Jamaica and Papua New Guinea have not ratified the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. The other 15 countries have ratified the Convention and accepted the obligations contained therein, including those of making torture an offence under criminal law and establishing appropriate penalties for perpetrators.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2010
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 62
- Paragraph text
- Judicial control of detention is a fundamental safeguard for persons deprived of liberty in connection with criminal charges. Persons detained on criminal charges must not be held in facilities under the control of their interviewers or investigators for more time than is legally required to hold a judicial hearing and obtain a judicial warrant of pretrial detention. This period should never exceed 48 hours, save absolutely exceptional and justified circumstances (see general comment No. 35). Suspects must be transferred to a pretrial facility under a different authority immediately thereafter, after which no further unsupervised contact with interviewers or investigators may be permitted (see A/68/295). As a matter of best practice, States ought to entrust different bodies with separate chains of command with the detention and questioning of persons, to help to protect detainees from mistreatment and reduce the risk of conditions of detention being used to pressure them during questioning. All detainees must be properly registered from the moment of apprehension, a public centralized detention register must be kept and the chain of custody thoroughly documented (see A/HRC/13/39/Add.5).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment from an extraterritorial perspective 2015, para. 51
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur regrets evidence that States have employed restrictive doctrines, such as State secrets and political questions doctrines, in both territorial and extraterritorial contexts, in an effort to obstruct prosecution and evade responsibility (El-Masri v. The United States), and reminds States that competent courts in States parties to the Convention are obligated to exercise jurisdiction over acts of torture and ill-treatment, irrespective of the locus where wrongfulness took place. This obligation should also encompass situations wherein a State may be held responsible for its failure to pre-empt or remedy illicit conduct not directly attributable to it, such as when it failed to meet its due diligence obligations to prevent and protect persons from grave violations of human rights. The Supreme Court of the Netherlands recognized in the Dutch battalion case that the State was responsible for the deaths of three men at Srebrenica, Bosnia and Herzegovina, by failing to shield the victims when they sought refuge in a Dutch compound over which the State exercised "effective control" - defined as "factual control over specific conduct" - under article 8 of the draft articles on the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. The Special Rapporteur welcomes the indication that States are not simply required to abstain from causing prohibited acts but are obligated, to the extent possible, to fight wrongfulness, including through investigation and prosecution of torture.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 49
- Paragraph text
- There is no universal instrument that specifies a minimum acceptable cell size, although domestic and regional jurisdictions have sometimes ruled on the matter. According to the European Court of Human Rights in Ramírez Sanchez v. France, a cell measuring 6.84 square metres is "large enough" for single occupancy. The Court did not elaborate on why such measures could be considered adequate; the Special Rapporteur respectfully begs to differ, especially if the single cell should also contain, at a minimum, toilet and washing facilities, bedding and a desk.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 66
- Paragraph text
- Ensure that the fundamental principles of investigation, such as competence, impartiality, independence, promptness and thoroughness are enshrined in legislation and officially recognized among relevant departments and personnel, including prosecutors, defence attorneys, judges, law enforcement, prison and military personnel, forensic and health professionals and those responsible for detainee health care.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 88j
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur calls upon all States to:] Actively engage with the open-ended intergovernmental Expert Group on the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners established by the Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice, to exchange information on good practices and challenges with a view to ensuring that the revised Rules reflect the recent advances in correctional science and best practices and to implement the Rules at the national level.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 44
- Paragraph text
- In Selçuk and Asker v. Turkey, the Court found the unjustified destruction of private homes to be inhuman treatment because it was “premeditated and carried out contemptuously and without respect for the feelings of the applicants”, who “had to stand by and watch the burning of their homes” while inadequate precautions were taken to ensure their safety and no subsequent assistance was provided.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Commissions of inquiry 2012, para. 27
- Paragraph text
- When used by States, a commission of inquiry can serve as a valuable tool in addressing the State's duty under international human rights law to investigate and hold an independent inquiry into torture, deaths (for example, in the case of extrajudicial executions) and other atrocities (A/HRC/8/3, para. 12).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 35
- Paragraph text
- Through its jurisprudence, the European Court of Human Rights emphasizes that certain procedural safeguards must be in place during the imposition of solitary confinement, for example, monitoring a prisoner's physical well-being, particularly where the individual is not in good health and having access to judicial review.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 22
- Paragraph text
- Political decisions to resort to torture or ill-treatment and the failure to prevent its use jeopardize States' international cooperation and harm their reputations, moral authority and legacies. Ultimately, torture only breeds more crime by fuelling hatred and a desire for vengeance against the perpetrators. Its use in Northern Ireland in the 1970s and during the so-called "war on terror" has served as a recruiting tool for the groups against which it was perpetrated.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment from an extraterritorial perspective 2015, para. 18
- Paragraph text
- The European Court of Human Rights also recognizes that States are responsible for the physical and mental integrity of persons under their authority, power or control, finding that States' responsibilities "may arise in respect of acts and events [taking place] outside [their] frontiers" and due to the acts of their agents, "whether performed within or outside national boundaries, which produce effects outside their own territory" (Loizidou v. Turkey; mutatis mutandis, M v. Denmark). Such scenarios recognized by the Court include the "exercise [of] authority and control over individuals killed in the course" of security operations by one State on the territory of another State (Al-Skeini v. The United Kingdom); the handover of individuals to the custody of a State's agents abroad (Öcalan v. Turkey); the interception and imposition of control over a ship (and persons therein) in international waters (Jamaa and others v. Italy); the detention of individuals in prisons operated or controlled by the State party abroad (Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi v. The United Kingdom); exercise of control over an area outside national territory as a consequence of military action (Hassan v. The United Kingdom); or the exercise of physical control over an individual, including outside formal detention facilities (Issa and others v. Turkey). Whenever a State exercises control over an individual extraterritorially through its agents, it must secure the substantive rights and freedoms under the Convention that are relevant to the situation of that individual (Al-Skeini).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Certain forms of abuses in health-care settings that may cross a threshold of mistreatment that is tantamount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2013, para. 29
- Paragraph text
- As the Special Rapporteur on the right to health observed, while informed consent is commonly enshrined in the legal framework at the national level, it is frequently compromised in the health-care setting. Structural inequalities, such as the power imbalance between doctors and patients, exacerbated by stigma and discrimination, result in individuals from certain groups being disproportionately vulnerable to having informed consent compromised (ibid., para. 92).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Health
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Certain forms of abuses in health-care settings that may cross a threshold of mistreatment that is tantamount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2013, para. 49
- Paragraph text
- For many rape survivors, access to a safe abortion procedure is made virtually impossible by a maze of administrative hurdles, and by official negligence and obstruction. In the landmark decision of K.N.L.H. v. Peru, the Human Rights Committee deemed the denial of a therapeutic abortion a violation of the individual's right to be free from ill-treatment. In the case of P. and S. v. Poland, ECHR stated that "the general stigma attached to abortion and to sexual violence …, caus[ed] much distress and suffering, both physically and mentally".
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Violence
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 46
- Paragraph text
- The administration of prisons and the conditions in which prisoners are held is governed by prison regulations and national laws, as well as by international human rights law. Fundamental norms that are binding by virtue of being treaty-based or part of customary international law are supplemented and interpreted through the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, adopted by the Economic and Social Council in 1957. Although not directly binding, the Standard Minimum Rules are widely accepted as the universal norm for the humane treatment of prisoners.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 56
- Paragraph text
- According to the European Court of Human Rights, States should also take steps to reduce the negative impact of solitary confinement. Where the damaging effects of solitary confinement on a particular individual are known, the regime cannot continue. The conditions of confinement are relevant in this respect, because where conditions are beyond reproach, the Court considers it unlikely that the minimum threshold of severity to find a violation of article 3 will be reached. Routine examination by doctors can be a factor in determining that there was no violation of article 3.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 57
- Paragraph text
- In terms of prosecutions, the Special Rapporteur was sadly surprised at the low number of people prosecuted for torture in the countries he visited. He came across cases of officials being subject to disciplinary or administrative procedures for offences such as abuse of power and, in some cases, convictions for offences such as causing physical injuries, as in Jordan and Paraguay. These types of convictions not only result from the lack of a specific criminal offence of torture, but are in some instances used to treat the act of torture as a minor offence.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2010
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 98
- Paragraph text
- The exclusionary rule also applies to evidence gathered or derived from information obtained under duress (see Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Cabrera García and Montiel Flores v. Mexico). States must carry the burden of proving that confessions were obtained without duress, intimidation or inducements. As a matter of best practice, the exclusionary rule should also apply to collecting, sharing and receiving information tainted by any form of coercion.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 83
- Paragraph text
- The interpreter's role during questioning is to facilitate communication neutrally and objectively. His or her presence serves as a safeguard against mistreatment and coercion. The protocol should provide practical guidance as to the role, rights and responsibilities of interpreters during the conduct of interviews and emphasize that the right to interpretation applies to the questioning of all persons who are arrested or deprived of liberty, including during armed conflict and in administrative detention (Body of Principles, principle 14).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 61
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur examines herein several safeguards of key significance to the future protocol, particularly as applicable to persons in detention. The protocol should also consider other scenarios, including the rights of suspects not deprived of liberty, safeguards attendant to informal questioning and additional preventive measures against mistreatment and coercion. The protocol must account for the reality that torture and ill-treatment during arrest or detention can also take place outside the interview room and induce forced confessions during subsequent questioning.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 39
- Paragraph text
- Similarly, in the case of Rosendo Cantú et al. v. Mexico, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights considered “that rape may constitute torture even when it consists of a single act or takes place outside State facilities … because the objective and subjective elements that define an act as torture do not refer to the accumulation of acts or to the place where the act is committed, but rather to the intention, the severity of the suffering and the purpose of the act”. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights also regarded as torture the intentional, violent beating of a person prior to arrest.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 41
- Paragraph text
- The Court has also made numerous findings of inhuman or degrading treatment in cases involving the unnecessary or excessive use of force in the context of demonstrations. In Abdullah Yasa and Others v. Turkey, the Court found the launch of a tear gas grenade along a direct flat trajectory aimed towards protestors to be contrary to article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights because it was not “proportionate to the aim pursued, namely to disperse a non-peaceful gathering” and because the severity of the resulting injuries to the applicant’s head were not “commensurate with the strict use by the police officers of the force necessitated by his behaviour”.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Violence
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 16
- Paragraph text
- It should be noted that the above-mentioned principles govern the use of force, not only in extra-custodial settings, but also where riots, unrest or other violent incidents occur within places of detention. Depending on the circumstances, they may also be relevant in determining the permissibility of invasive health and security procedures, such as the taking of bodily samples or a strip search. In their relations with persons deprived of their liberty, law enforcement officials may not use force, except when strictly necessary for the maintenance of security and order within the institution or when personal safety is threatened, and they may not use firearms, except in self-defence or in the defence of others against the immediate threat of death or serious injury or when strictly necessary to prevent the escape of an inmate presenting a threat of death or serious injury.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 49
- Paragraph text
- The protocol must reiterate the precise aim of questioning, namely to obtain accurate and reliable information in order to discover the truth of all relevant facts about matters under investigation. The aim of interviews must not be to elicit confessions or other information reinforcing presumptions of guilt or other assumptions held by officers. Interviews are conducted to make the presumption of innocence operational. Officers generate and actively test alternative hypotheses through systematic preparation, empathetic rapport-building, open-ended questions, active listening, strategic probing and disclosure of potential evidence. Such interviews are far more effective and compliant with human rights.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 40
- Paragraph text
- Inducements may consist of promises of immunity or lighter sentences in exchange for confessions. Misleading practices include the use of trickery or deception, including by presenting false evidence, confronting persons with false witnesses or leading one to believe that his or her co-defendants have confessed. These methods are improper because they ultimately deprive a person of his or her freedom of decision through the use of false representations (see E/CN.4/813 and Corr.1). Techniques designed to minimize or maximize the suspect's perceptions of responsibility or blame, including implicit promises of leniency and presentation of false evidence, claims or insinuations about the existence of evidence against him or her, also increase the likelihood of false confessions.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 23
- Paragraph text
- Professional interviewers repeatedly emphasize that interviews are conducted much more effectively without resort to torture, ill-treatment or coercion. The Special Rapporteur welcomes strides made by some States in fashioning and implementing human rights-based standards and guidelines for investigations and non-coercive interviewing practices, but is concerned that mistreatment and coercive questioning remain prevalent in many jurisdictions. Some progress notwithstanding, State practice most often ignores the relevant normative frameworks and fails to heed key due process guarantees and procedural safeguards designed to combat abuses committed during investigations and questioning that are codified in national legislation.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 52
- Paragraph text
- The development and maintenance of rapport is also a crucial determinant of effective non-coercive interviews. Rapport can help to reduce the interviewee's anxiety, anger or distress, while increasing the likelihood of obtaining more complete and reliable information. Rapport-building techniques must not be used for the purposes of manipulation or to exert undue pressure to induce confessions, which would be incompatible with the purpose and spirit of the investigative interviewing model. The protocol should clearly set out the duty of interviewers to maintain a professional attitude and refrain from using any form of coercion during the entire interview process. It must also emphasize that interviewers ought to obtain the cooperation of persons questioned, rather than to demonstrate their authority or gain control over them, manipulate them or force them to comply with their wishes.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Health
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 53
- Paragraph text
- It is recommended that interviewers begin each topic by asking open-ended questions and allow the interviewee to provide a free and uninterrupted account of the events under investigation. Contrary to complex, leading or compound questions, open-ended and neutral questions encourage memory retrieval and are less likely to induce admissions against a person's will, influence his or her account or contaminate his or her memory. Broad and open-ended questions will enable innocent suspects to provide information freely, while preventing guilty suspects from understanding their evidentiary significance.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Health
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 54
- Paragraph text
- As a matter of best practice, interviewers are encouraged to proceed, when necessary, with probing questions designed to elicit information that will test all possible alternative explanations identified during the preparation of the interview. Strategic probing and disclosure of potential evidence allows officers to explore the interviewee's account in depth before proceeding to the next topic, helping to ensure that the presumption of innocence is respected while strengthening the case against a guilty suspect by preventing the subsequent fabrication of an alibi. Although interviewers may be persistent with their line of questioning when probing the interviewee's account, questioning must never become unfair or oppressive.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 18
- Paragraph text
- Behavioural and brain sciences underlie the recognition that mistreatment and coercion are unreliable and counterproductive means to elicit accurate information. Torture and ill-treatment harm those areas of the brain associated with memory, mood and general cognitive function. Depending on their severity, chronicity and type, associated stressors typically impair encoding, consolidation and retrieval of memories, especially where practices such as repeated suffocation, extended sleep deprivation and caloric restriction are used in combination. Such practices weaken, disorient and confuse subjects, distort their sense of time and render them prone to fabricate memories, even if they are otherwise willing to answer questions. They are also detrimental to the establishment of trust and rapport, and compromise the interviewer's ability to understand a person's values, motivations and knowledge - elements required for a successful interview.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Health
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment from an extraterritorial perspective 2015, para. 58
- Paragraph text
- A State's failure to investigate, criminally prosecute or allow civil proceedings - or efforts to block or hinder such proceedings - relating to allegations of torture or other forms of ill-treatment constitutes de facto denial of an effective remedy. The Special Rapporteur regrets that this has been the case regarding victims of rendition and other extraterritorial acts of torture and ill-treatment seeking redress from Governments and reminds States that an essential component of the obligation to provide redress is the obligation not to obstruct redress or obstruct access of an individual to an effective remedy, for example by invoking "State secrets" to dismiss lawsuits in limine litis.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment from an extraterritorial perspective 2015, para. 54
- Paragraph text
- The Committee (P.E. v. France; Agiza v. Sweden; Pelit v. Azerbaijan; Dzemajl v. Yugoslavia), the European Court of Human Rights (Othman v. The United Kingdom) and the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights (Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights and Interights v. Egypt) have firmly ruled against the use of evidence obtained by torture, demonstrating that international law has declared its unequivocal opposition to the admission of such evidence. The Special Rapporteur recalls that all States have an obligation to ascertain whether statements admitted as evidence in any proceedings for which they have jurisdiction, including extradition proceedings, have been made as a result of torture (G.K. v. Switzerland).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment from an extraterritorial perspective 2015, para. 39
- Paragraph text
- The European Court has consistently held that the absolute nature of the prohibition on torture and other ill-treatment implies a positive obligation not to send individuals to States where they face a real risk of prohibited treatment (Saadi v. Italy). A State's responsibility is engaged whenever its agents fail to take reasonable steps to avoid a risk of ill-treatment about which they knew or ought to have known at the time of transfer (Abu Zubaydah v. Poland). The Committee against Torture similarly has found that State decisions to expel or render individuals to places where they face a real risk of ill-treatment breaches the Convention (P. E. v. France).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Movement
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 49
- Paragraph text
- In addition, State responsibility also derives from existing customary rules, as codified in the draft articles on the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts adopted by the International Law Commission at its fifty-third session. They confirm that no State should provide aid or assistance to another State in the commission of an internationally wrongful act (draft articles 16-18), should not recognize as lawful a situation created by a "serious breach" of its obligations under peremptory norms of international law and should cooperate to bring the breach to an end (draft articles 40 and 41). Therefore, if a State were to be torturing detainees, other States would have a duty to cooperate to bring such a serious breach of the prohibition against torture to an end and would be required not to give any aid or assistance to its continuation (A/67/396, para. 48, and A/HRC/13/42, para. 42).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment from an extraterritorial perspective 2015, para. 20
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur recognizes several potential scenarios of complicity in torture and other ill-treatment with an extraterritorial component. First, a State may acquiesce to an extraterritorial human rights violation by a second State on its territory (European Court of Human Rights, El-Masri v. The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia). Second, complicity itself can be extraterritorial, as in cases where the individual suffering a violation is located in a territory outside the complicit State's control and under the control of the principal. Examples include the alleged collusion, connivance, presence or participation of Canadian and British intelligence services in the interrogation and mistreatment abroad of Omar Khadr, Maher Arar and Binyam Mohamed.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment from an extraterritorial perspective 2015, para. 45
- Paragraph text
- Article 5 (1) requires States to take legislative measures to establish jurisdiction based on the territoriality, flag and active and passive nationality principles with a view to prosecuting any act of torture committed in "any territory under [the State's] jurisdiction" and to take all measures necessary to investigate the crime, arrest the alleged offender and bring him or her to justice before its domestic courts. In the example provided by a former mandate holder, if an Egyptian intelligence agent on board a Central Intelligence Agency rendition aircraft registered in the United States were to torture a Jordanian citizen when flying through Irish airspace, Egypt, the United States and Ireland would all be required to investigate the case and issue an arrest warrant (as would be Jordan, upon accepting the passive personality principle). In recognition of the obligation to investigate and prosecute all acts of torture, Italian courts convicted in absentia 23 United States and two Italian officials involved in the abduction and extraordinary rendition of Abu Omar to Egypt, where he was tortured.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 72b
- Paragraph text
- [Recommendations regarding capacity-building and training:] Enhance the skills of health and legal professionals on the effective medical documentation of torture and other ill-treatment through training on the use of the Istanbul Protocol and other relevant materials to forensic pathologists, medico-legal officers, general practitioners, psychiatrists, psychologists, Ministry of Health officials and social workers; as well as lawyers, State investigators, prosecutors, judges, prison officials, police officers, immigration officers, NGO activists, members of national human rights commissions and similar bodies, representatives of the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of the Interior.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 32
- Paragraph text
- In their judgment on the case of A and others v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, a majority of the House of Lords agreed that evidence should be excluded from judicial proceedings if it is established, by means of diligent inquiries into the sources and on a balance of probabilities, that the evidence invoked was in fact obtained by torture. However, three Law Lords, in a minority opinion, strongly rejected the test applied for the burden of proof preferred by the majority, arguing that it placed a burden on the appellants that they can seldom discharge. They concluded that "it is inconsistent with the most rudimentary notions of fairness to blindfold a man and then impose a standard which only the sighted could hope to meet", thereby effectively denying detainees the standard of fairness and undermining the effectiveness of the Convention.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 37
- Paragraph text
- In many jurisdictions, the forensic services are closely linked with law enforcement agencies and criminal forensic investigations are undertaken in-house by police services. If medical staff, including forensic doctors, serve under law enforcement or security agencies or the prison sector, they are under the same employer as the officers in charge of interrogating and holding detainees. They may have conflicted loyalty between their employer and their professional obligation to report torture or ill-treatment, out of fear of jeopardizing their employment or other reprisals. In the context of allegations of torture or other ill-treatment, the provision of forensic services from within the police force and lack of independent oversight has been criticised by the Special Rapporteur on previous occasions and the mandate has recommended that systems be reorganised to ensure independence from the police. In addition, in those cases, it should be mandatory to submit the person to an independent assessment, external from prison medical services.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 39
- Paragraph text
- Therefore, where a detainee or any other person alleges torture or other ill-treatment or where there is reason to believe that torture or other ill-treatment has happened, alleged victims should be given an immediate examination by a doctor who can make an accurate report without interference by the authorities. Forensic evaluation must conform to established standards of medical practice, be undertaken only with prior informed consent, conducted in private and take full account of the victim's statements. The undertaking of such evaluation should not be dependent on the initiation of an official investigation or subject to prior authorization by an investigating authority. Furthermore, the right to request an independent medical evaluation should also extend to members of the detainee's family and other bodies designated to receive complaints. In cases of death in custody, the deceased's family and, in their absence, other interested parties, must have the right to request an autopsy to be performed by an independent health professional of their choice.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Certain forms of abuses in health-care settings that may cross a threshold of mistreatment that is tantamount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2013, para. 79
- Paragraph text
- The mandate has noted that "members of sexual minorities are disproportionately subjected to torture and other forms of ill-treatment because they fail to conform to socially constructed gender expectations. Indeed, discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity may often contribute to the process of the dehumanization of the victim, which is often a necessary condition for torture and ill-treatment to take place." "Medically worthless" practices of subjecting men suspected of homosexual conduct to non-consensual anal examinations to "prove" their homosexuality have been condemned by the Committee against Torture, the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture and the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, which have held that the practice contravenes the prohibition of torture and ill-treatment (A/HRC/19/41, para. 37).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Gender
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Certain forms of abuses in health-care settings that may cross a threshold of mistreatment that is tantamount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2013, para. 43
- Paragraph text
- The numerous calls by various international and regional organizations to close compulsory drug detention centres, as well as the numerous injunctions and recommendations contained in the recently released guidelines by WHO on pharmacotherapy for opiate dependence, the UNODC policy guidance on the organization's human rights responsibilities in drug detention centres, and resolutions by the Commission on Narcotic Drugs, are routinely ignored. These centres continue to operate often with direct or indirect support and assistance from international donors without any adequate human rights oversight.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 39
- Paragraph text
- It is important to consider that the deprivation of the right to individual self-determination is not incidental to criminal punishment or any other form of custodial care. The current phrasing of Rule 57 can be misunderstood as meaning that deprivation of liberty results in the withdrawal of individual self-determination. It may be pertinent to redraft Rule 58 in order to clarify that only reasonable boundaries inherent to the regime in the places of detention apply. Likewise, Rule 69 could be amended to omit the reference to the conduct of a study of the personality of prisoners, as potentially in conflict with the right to personal self-determination.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 85
- Paragraph text
- Over the past few decades, there has been a significant increase in the worldwide prison population, placing an enormous financial burden on States. It is estimated that there are over 10 million prisoners in the world, and prison populations are growing on all five continents. Imprisonment has become an almost automatic response rather than a last resort, as mirrored in increasing and disproportionate penalization, excessive use of pretrial detention, increased length of prison sentences and little use of non-custodial alternatives (see General Assembly resolution 45/110, annex). Furthermore, the penitentiary system in most countries is no longer aimed at the reformation and social rehabilitation of convicts but simply aims to punish by locking offenders away. Non-compliance with international standards in relation to conditions of detention is caused by resource constraints and by the punitive approach of most criminal justice systems. Corruption too clearly plays a negative role (see A/64/215 and Corr.1, para. 80).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Certain forms of abuses in health-care settings that may cross a threshold of mistreatment that is tantamount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2013, para. 52
- Paragraph text
- Many countries fail to make adequate arrangements for the supply of these medications. Low- and middle-income countries account for 6 per cent of morphine use worldwide while having about half of all cancer patients and 95 per cent of all new HIV infections. Thirty-two countries in Africa have almost no morphine available at all. In the United States, over a third of patients are not adequately treated for pain. In France, a study found that doctors underestimated pain in over half of their AIDS patients. In India, more than half of the country's regional cancer centres do not have morphine or doctors trained in using it. This is despite the fact that 70 per cent or more of their patients have advanced cancer and are likely to require pain treatment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Health
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 41
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur recalls the importance of introducing a rule allowing all who are deprived of their liberty to challenge expeditiously the lawfulness of the detention, e.g. through habeas corpus or amparo, as a safeguard for ensuring protection against torture or other ill-treatment. In all circumstances, the person deprived of liberty should have the right to inform his or her family of the arrest (Rules 44 (3) and 92) and place of detention within 18 hours (E/CN.4/2003/68, paras. 26 (g) and (i)). These rules should apply also to decisions to restrict the personal freedom of an inmate further, for instance by placing him or her in isolation or solitary confinement. In no case may a detainee's contact with the outside world be dependent on his or her cooperativeness, be used as a disciplinary sanction or form part of the sentence. In accordance with principle 19 of the Body of Principles, access to the outside world can only be denied subject to reasonable conditions and restrictions as specified by law (see E/CN.4/2004/56, para. 43).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 48
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur recalls that inter-prisoner violence may amount to torture or other ill-treatment if the State fails to act with due diligence to prevent it (A/HRC/13/39/Add.3, para. 28). As stated by the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, the State assumes a heightened duty of protection by severely limiting an inmates' freedom of movement and capacity for self-defence (A/61/311, para. 51). Despite the unambiguous wording of the Convention against Torture, there is a lack of awareness of the obligation of prison administration to intervene in inter-prisoner violence. The Special Rapporteur on torture notes that acquiescence in inter-prisoner violence is not simply a breach of professional responsibilities but that it amounts to consent or acquiescence to torture or other ill-treatment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 42
- Paragraph text
- Furthermore, given that safeguards are particularly undermined when the detained persons are held in incommunicado or secret detention, the Rules should place an obligation on prison authorities to ensure that persons deprived of liberty are held in officially recognized and accessible places of detention. Police station chiefs and investigating officers should be held criminally accountable for any unacknowledged custody in cases where their responsibility, including command responsibility, has been established. The Special Rapporteur recalls that whether detention is secret or not is determined by its incommunicado character and by the fact that State authorities do not disclose the place of detention or information about the fate of the detainee (see A/HRC/13/42, paras. 8-10).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 40
- Paragraph text
- As a principle of general application, the Rules should explicitly consider all inmates as subjects of rights and duties and not objects of treatment or correction. Given that mental ill-treatment may be inflicted under the name of remedial, educational, moral, spiritual and other forces and forms of assistance, the review process offers an opportunity to revisit Rule 59 in order to limit the applicable methods to those respectful of the prisoners' inherent dignity and value as human beings. In this respect, there is a need to revisit the concepts of "rehabilitation" and "re-education", as well as of "corrective" and "correctional", among others, in order to protect persons deprived of liberty from arbitrary intervention or treatment that may amount to torture or other ill-treatment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Education
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Commissions of inquiry 2012, para. 39
- Paragraph text
- The Human Rights Council also mandated a fact-finding mission on the Gaza conflict, in 2009, and a fact-finding mission for the Syrian Arab Republic, in 2012.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Commissions of inquiry 2012, para. 68
- Paragraph text
- The purposes of a commission of inquiry warrant a more flexible approach to rules of evidence, including the credibility of witness testimony. In assessing the credibility of evidence, a commission of inquiry should give special weight to corroborated testimony and to testimony subjected to cross-examination. A commission should also apply general rules in their assessment of the credibility of witnesses, including demeanour, subject to cultural and gender sensitivities. A commission should always accept testimony that is not subject to cross-examination, and should also avail itself of testimony that, if rendered in court, would be excludable as hearsay.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Commissions of inquiry 2012, para. 45
- Paragraph text
- In response to international pressure, the President of Kyrgyzstan, after consultations with the European Union, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, established a commission of inquiry into the events in southern Kyrgyzstan. The Special Rapporteur will take note of these findings in his forthcoming report on Kyrgyzstan, following his visit in December 2011. He will also take note of the Government's response when formulating his own recommendations, which will include an examination of the events of June 2010 in Osh and surrounding provinces, in addition to other issues within the scope of his mandate.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
The death penalty and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 2012, para. 80c
- Paragraph text
- [Whether or not a customary norm prohibiting the death penalty has crystallized, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all retentionist States to observe rigorously the restrictions and conditions imposed by article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and article 1 or article 16 of the Convention against Torture. The Special Rapporteur calls upon retentionist States:] To refrain from carrying out executions in public or in any other degrading manner; end the practice of secret executions; and end the practice of executions with little or no prior warning given to condemned prisoners and their families;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Commissions of inquiry 2012, para. 55
- Paragraph text
- If a commission of inquiry precedes formal criminal prosecutions, or the two mechanisms exist simultaneously, care must be taken to ensure that the work of the commission does not inhibit prosecutions in any way. In establishing an international commission of inquiry to investigate the assassination of former Prime Minister of Pakistan Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto, the Secretary-General agreed that the international commission should be fact-finding in nature and not be a criminal investigation; the duty of carrying out a criminal investigation, finding the perpetrators and bringing them to justice, remains with the competent Pakistani authorities.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
The death penalty and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 2012, para. 47
- Paragraph text
- Prolonged delay is, however, only one cause of the death row phenomenon and, considered alone, may be harmful to a prisoner's rights. This approach risks conveying a message to States parties to carry out a capital sentence as expeditiously as possible after it is imposed. The Human Rights Committee declined to find that delay alone is enough to warrant a finding of death row phenomenon and a violation based on torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment. Consequently, even in cases of detention on death row for more than 10 years, the Committee maintained its previous practice of not finding a violation of article 7 of the Covenant unless such detention was aggravated by particularly harsh prison conditions. However, prolonged detention, as with any other delay in the process, must be subject to judicial review and the highest standards of regular review must be applied. Medical assistance and psychological follow-up should also be considered. It is the combined deprivation of basic human rights on death row which amounts to inhuman and degrading treatment or even torture.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
The death penalty and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 2012, para. 43
- Paragraph text
- Regional courts have confirmed the existence and destructive nature of the death row phenomenon. In the landmark decision Soering v. United Kingdom (1989), the European Court of Human Rights held that the death row phenomenon as practised in the State of Virginia in the United States of America violated the prohibition of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. The Court was presented with facts detailing the extensive period of time people spend on death row in extreme conditions and the ever-mounting anguish of awaiting execution. The European Court in subsequent decisions reaffirmed this view.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
The death penalty and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 2012, para. 33
- Paragraph text
- The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights has suggested that hanging, as a matter of law, is contrary to article 7 of the Covenant. In 2007, the High Commissioner submitted an amicus curiae application to the Iraqi Supreme Criminal Tribunal because of the real risk that the method of execution would itself amount to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Acknowledging that the prohibition of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment was a core provision of international human rights law, the High Commissioner found that the executions (by hanging), were so flawed as to amount, in their implementation, to cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
The death penalty and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 2012, para. 38
- Paragraph text
- Following a number of executions in the United States, it has recently become apparent that the regimen, as currently administered, does not work as efficiently as intended. Some prisoners take many minutes to die and others become very distressed. New studies conclude that even if lethal injection is administered without technical error, those executed may experience suffocation, and therefore the conventional view of lethal injection as a peaceful and painless death is questionable. Experts suggest that current protocols used for lethal injection in the United States probably violate the prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Health
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
The death penalty and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 2012, para. 46
- Paragraph text
- In 1993, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council of the British House of Lords took the approach that length of time is the sole factor in constituting cruel or inhuman punishment. The case of Pratt and Morgan v. Jamaica created a presumption that spending more than five years on death row met the criteria necessary for a finding of death row phenomenon. The Privy Council's reasoning was that the domestic appeals process should take approximately two years and an appeal to an international body should take approximately 18 months. By combining the two, and adding an appropriate amount of time for reasonable delay, the Court was able to come up with a timetable of five years. In a number of cases, the Privy Council relied on the five-year principle as a guide. In Guerra v. Baptiste (1996), it found that four years and ten months under sentence of death, as a result of factors beyond the prisoner's control, constituted the death row phenomenon and therefore a violation. In Henfield v. Bahamas (1997), three and a half years was deemed an appropriate time limit. Similarly, in the landmark ruling of the Supreme Court of Uganda in January 2009, the Court held that to execute a person after a delay of three years in conditions that were not acceptable by Ugandan standards would amount to cruel, inhuman punishment. With regard to the reasons for the delay, the Privy Council found that delay inappropriately caused by the prisoner could not be used to the advantage of the inmate but where a State caused the delay, it was logical to hold the State responsible for violating the prisoner's rights. However, where delay was caused by a prisoner exercising his legitimate right to appeal, the fault was to be attributed to the appellate system that permitted such delay and not to the prisoner who took advantage of it. The Privy Council recognized that a prisoner would cling to any hope in order to protect his or her life, and that such human instinct could not be treated as a prisoner's fault. The European Court went even further and took the position that even if the delay was the result of the inmate's actions, he or she was not to be blamed for pursuing life as the fact remained that individuals were pursuing life under death row conditions with mounting tension over their own death.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
The death penalty and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 2012, para. 49
- Paragraph text
- Other harsh conditions currently employed on death rows throughout the world may themselves constitute violations of the prohibition of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. The Human Rights Committee has expressed concern over the living condition of inmates on death row in terms of visits and correspondence, cell size, food, exercise, extreme temperatures, lack of ventilation, and lack of time outside of cells as constituting violations of articles 7 and 10 of the Covenant. The Special Rapporteur's predecessor, in the report on his visit to Mongolia, declared that physical conditions on Mongolia's death row alone might be so poor as to amount to cruel treatment (see E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.4).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Health
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 38
- Paragraph text
- The Court has additionally recognized that solitary confinement results in psychological and physical suffering that may contribute to treatment that constitutes torture. In at least one case, the Court has identified the physical conditions of solitary confinement, including "a small cell with no ventilation or natural light", and a prison regime where a detained individual "is held for 23 and a half hours a day ..., [and] permitted to see his relatives only once a month, but could have no physical contact with them", when coupled with other forms of physical and psychological aggression, in sum may constitute physical and psychological torture.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Person(s) affected
- Families
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 89
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur reiterates that solitary confinement should be used only in very exceptional circumstances, as a last resort, for as short a time as possible. He emphasizes that when solitary confinement is used in exceptional circumstances, minimum procedural safeguards must be followed. These safeguards reduce the chances that the use of solitary confinement will be arbitrary or excessive, as in the case of prolonged or indefinite confinement. They are all the more important in circumstances of detention where due process protections are often limited, as in administrative immigration detention. Minimum procedural safeguards should be interpreted in a manner that provides the greatest possible protection of the rights of detained individuals. In this context, the Special Rapporteur urges States to apply the following guiding principles and procedural safeguards.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 52
- Paragraph text
- The principal aspects of a prison regime relevant to an assessment of the conditions of solitary confinement include access to outdoor exercise and programming, access to meaningful human contact within the prison, and contact with the outside world. In accordance with rule 21 of the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, every prisoner who is not employed in outdoor work shall have at least one hour of suitable exercise in the open air daily if the weather permits. Similarly, the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture emphasizes that all prisoners without exception should be afforded the opportunity to have one hour of open-air exercise per day. However, State practice indicates that these standards are not always observed. In Jordan, for example, a detainee was allowed outside of his solitary confinement cell for only one hour per week (A/HRC/4/33/Add.3, appendix, para. 21). In Poltrotsky v. Ukraine, the European Court of Human Rights found that a lack of opportunity for outdoor exercise, coupled with a lack of access to natural light, constitutes a violation of article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 61
- Paragraph text
- There is no international standard for the permitted maximum overall duration of solitary confinement. In A.B. v. Russia, the European Court of Human Rights held that detaining an individual in solitary confinement for three years constituted a violation of article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. By contrast, in the United States of America, it is reported that two prisoners have been held in solitary confinement in a Louisiana prison for 40 years after failed attempts at judicial appeal of the conditions of their confinement. As explained in paragraph 26 above, the Special Rapporteur finds that solitary confinement exceeding 15 days is prolonged.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 41
- Paragraph text
- The imposition of solitary confinement as a part of an individual's judicially imposed sentence often arises in circumstances of particularly egregious crimes or crimes against the State. For instance, in some central European States, individuals convicted and sentenced to capital punishment and to life imprisonment serve their time in solitary confinement (A/64/215, para. 53). In other States, such as in Mongolia, death sentences may be commuted to life sentences spent in solitary confinement (E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.4, para. 47). The use of solitary confinement as a disciplinary measure within prisons is also well documented and is likely the most pervasive rationale for the use of solitary confinement as a form of punishment. Disciplinary measures usually involve the violation of a prison rule. For instance, in Nigeria detainees are punished with solitary confinement of up to three days for disciplinary offences (A/HRC/7/3/Add.4, appendix I, para. 113). Similarly, in the Abepura Prison in Indonesia, solitary confinement for up to eight days is used as a disciplinary measure for persons who violate prison rules (A/HRC/7/3/Add.7, appendix I, para. 37).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 50
- Paragraph text
- The presence of windows and light is also of critical importance to the adequate treatment of detainees in solitary confinement. Under rule 11 of the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, there should be sufficient light to enable the detainee to work or read, and windows so constructed as to allow airflow whether or not artificial ventilation is provided. However, State practice reveals that this standard is often not met. For example, in Georgia, window-openings in solitary confinement cells were found to have steel sheets welded to the outside bars, which restricted light and ventilation (E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.3, para. 47). In Israel, solitary confinement cells are often lit with fluorescent bulbs as their only source of light, and they have no source of fresh air.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Person(s) affected
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 48
- Paragraph text
- The principal physical conditions relevant to solitary confinement are cell size, presence of windows and light, and access to sanitary fixtures for personal hygiene. In practice, solitary confinement cells typically share some common features, including: location in a separate or remote part of the prison; small, or partially covered windows; sealed air quality; stark appearance and dull colours; toughened cardboard or other tamperproof furniture bolted to the floor; and small and barren exercise cages or yards (E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.3, para. 47). In some jurisdictions, prisoners in solitary confinement are held in leg irons and subjected to other physical restraints (A/HRC/13/39/Add.4, para. 76 (f)).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Health
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 44
- Paragraph text
- Individuals determined to be terrorist suspects or national security risks are often subjected to solitary confinement as well. For instance, in Equatorial Guinea a section of the Black Beach Prison consisting of single cells is used for solitary confinement of high security prisoners (A/HRC/13/39/Add.4, appendix I). Solitary confinement can be also used as a coercive interrogation technique, and is often an integral part of enforced disappearance or incommunicado detention (A/63/175, annex). As noted within category (a) in paragraph 40 above, national security also serves as a primary reason for the imposition of solitary confinement as a result of a judicial sentence. For example, in China an individual sentenced for "unlawfully supplying State secrets or intelligence to entities outside China" was allegedly held in solitary confinement for two years of her eight-year sentence (E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.6, appendix 2, para. 26).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 47
- Paragraph text
- The particular conditions in which detainees are held in solitary confinement vary between institutions and jurisdictions. Most, however, have a number of physical and non-physical conditions (or a prison regime) in common.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 26
- Paragraph text
- Solitary confinement is also known as "segregation", "isolation", "separation", "cellular", "lockdown", "Supermax", "the hole" or "Secure Housing Unit (SHU)", but all these terms can involve different factors. For the purposes of this report, the Special Rapporteur defines solitary confinement as the physical and social isolation of individuals who are confined to their cells for 22 to 24 hours a day. Of particular concern to the Special Rapporteur is prolonged solitary confinement, which he defines as any period of solitary confinement in excess of 15 days. He is aware of the arbitrary nature of the effort to establish a moment in time which an already harmful regime becomes prolonged and therefore unacceptably painful. He concludes that 15 days is the limit between "solitary confinement" and "prolonged solitary confinement" because at that point, according to the literature surveyed, some of the harmful psychological effects of isolation can become irreversible.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 55
- Paragraph text
- Ex officio investigations, as required by article 12 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, are one of the strongest tools for preventing torture and combating impunity. As victims are often unaware of existing complaints mechanisms, they lack confidence that their complaints will be effectively addressed or they are afraid to file them. This problem is worse in countries where the obligation to initiate ex officio investigations is not enshrined in the law, as was observed by the Special Rapporteur in some of his missions, including those to Jamaica and Sri Lanka. Whenever there are reasonable grounds, including credible evidence, that an act of torture has been committed, States should conduct an investigation, irrespective of whether a complaint has been filed. In Jordan, the Special Rapporteur found that even though the Court of Cassation had overturned a number of convictions on the grounds that security officials had obtained confessions under torture, this did not trigger official criminal investigations against the perpetrators. The same holds true for Sri Lanka.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2010
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 72
- Paragraph text
- While the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture and international donors such as the European Union (EU), as well as private foundations, are the most important sources of support for rehabilitation centres, it has to be noted that Governments fall overwhelmingly short of their obligation and leave domestic centres and torture survivors struggling. The Special Rapporteur interprets this shortcoming as a further example of the prevalent reluctance on the part of States to deal with the issue of torture in a rigorous manner and to acknowledge the scope of the problem. The unwillingness to ensure adequate funding of domestic rehabilitation centres is a manifestation of the same attitude of taking torture prevention lightly that results in failure to investigate crimes perpetrated by State agents and to eventually hold them accountable.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Year
- 2010
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 71
- Paragraph text
- As earlier emphasized, international human rights law places States under the obligation to ensure that victims of torture are provided with the means for as full physical and psychological rehabilitation as possible, implying the establishment or support of torture rehabilitation centres. At the same time, one has to realize that the majority of torture survivors do not have access to adequate treatment. Most centres, where they do exist, are overburdened by the number of victims, and their staff members constantly operate on the verge of exhaustion. This distressing situation is largely attributable to the limited financial support for rehabilitation centres. Reflecting this impasse, the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture, as one of the main sources of funding for rehabilitation centres worldwide, receives grant requests every year for more than double the resources it is provided with by a relatively small number of donor States. In its 2009 report, the Board of Trustees of the Fund held out the prospect of a financial gap of 3 million United States dollars, which would equate to a reduction of its grants by 20 per cent unless State contributions increase. Furthermore, the recent global financial crisis has had a tangible impact on many centres, forcing them to cut back existing services because funding from private foundations has decreased. The Kosovo Rehabilitation Centre for Torture Victims, in Pristina, which has carried out excellent work, is facing closure in December 2010 because of a lack of funding. In Greece, the Medical Rehabilitation Centre for Torture Victims, in Athens, closed in 2009 for lack of funding, resulting in a complete lack of rehabilitation centres for torture victims.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Year
- 2010
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 69
- Paragraph text
- More subtle, but similarly obstructive, has been the introduction of new, sweepingly restrictive regulations for civil society organizations in many countries. While it has to be recognized that it is within the discretion of each State to adopt domestic legislation concerning non-governmental organizations, such provisions sometimes appear to be more the expression of a general suspicion or even hostility towards the work of civil society organizations working in the field of human rights, rather than serving any reasonable administrative purpose. In Egypt, the El Nadeem Centre for Rehabilitation of Victims of Violence, which provides holistic support to victims of torture through medical rehabilitation, family support and legal aid, is threatened by a proposed law on non-governmental organizations. If approved, the law will lead to the centre's closure, along with that of many independent non governmental organizations. A similar situation already exists in Algeria, where the political situation presents extreme challenges for the establishment of non governmental organizations. As a result, despite efforts by the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims, there is as yet no rehabilitation centre in the country. Likewise, in the Sudan, the Amel Centre for Treatment and Rehabilitation of Victims of Torture was recently closed in a crackdown on independent non-governmental organizations. Yet, in other areas work continues. In Zimbabwe, the Counselling Services Unit, which the Special Rapporteur visited in 2008, is a heartening example of how courageous individuals manage to provide crucial rehabilitation services and documentation in sometimes extreme circumstances. There are other examples of rehabilitation centres providing unmatched services, yet many prefer to keep a low profile because of the dangers of public exposure resulting from the nature of their work.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Year
- 2010
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 67
- Paragraph text
- Throughout his tenure of the mandate, the Special Rapporteur has been impressed by the courageous, dedicated and professional work undertaken by rehabilitation centres around the world. In all the centres he visited during his fact finding missions, he was impressed that staff members had been working extremely hard and often at considerable personal sacrifice. Confronted with the continuous arrival of new victims, aware of the large number of those who cannot be reached and knowing how quickly a person's life can be broken and how long it takes to heal, their work may at times appear frustrating. Working with survivors of torture involves listening to their experiences of abuse and its consequences, and may place a considerable psychological burden on those treating torture victims. Nevertheless, the staff of rehabilitation centres work relentlessly, often on a voluntary basis, in order to provide treatment and shelter.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Humanitarian
- Violence
- Year
- 2010
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 65
- Paragraph text
- It is important to note that the services provided by rehabilitation centres for the victims of torture go beyond the medical aspects of rehabilitation. They also contribute to raising awareness of the issue of torture and the establishment of justice. Alerting and informing society of the prevalence of torture and States' involvement in it can trigger public pressure and eventually bring about policy changes. During his visit to the Republic of Moldova, the Special Rapporteur was impressed with the work of the Medical Centre for Rehabilitation of Torture Victims in Chisinau, which had managed to inform, train and mobilize lawyers, journalists and other professionals in order to support victims and disseminate information about cases of torture, both within the country and abroad. In the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Medical Foundation for the Care of Victims of Torture initiates programmes of survivor activism, encouraging victims to share with the public their stories, images and communications about survival, and works to make their voices heard. Similarly, centres in Argentina, Brazil and Chile are at the forefront when it comes to dealing with the legacy of the national security regimes and the continuing impunity for the crimes committed during those periods. In many countries, rehabilitation centres engage in campaigns advocating for legal reform and the passing of laws that comply with the Convention against Torture and its Optional Protocol. In Pakistan, Struggle for Change, aside from providing multidisciplinary services to survivors, played a leading role in national advocacy efforts that eventually contributed to the ratification of the Convention.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Year
- 2010
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 64
- Paragraph text
- Centres for the rehabilitation of victims of torture support survivors in their efforts to learn to live with their experiences and assist them in regaining the strength to lead self-determined lives. Reflecting the far-reaching consequences of torture, rehabilitation centres provide a holistic treatment for survivors, aimed at healing their "bodies, minds and social ties". Rehabilitation centres possess specialized medical know-how and experience in dealing with torture injuries, and provide primary care and sometimes longer in-patient stays focusing on pain relief and the avoidance of any long-term physical impairment. Their specialization in torture traumata facilitates the provision of high-quality care, and provides expertise from which other members of the health community, for example local hospitals, can learn. In terms of psychological treatment, rehabilitation centres constitute first and foremost a safe haven where survivors have their suffering acknowledged and can develop trust towards those around them. The specific treatment that is eventually provided depends on their specific situation and personality and the type of abuse they have suffered, and also reflects the relevant cultural context. Patients may initially stay for some time at the rehabilitation centres, where intensive psychological counselling and, if needed, adequate psychotropic medication is provided. Overwhelmingly, the experience of torture requires long-term psychological support, which may include individual or group counselling, occupational therapy, social rehabilitation and other forms of support. Rehabilitation centres assist their clients for years on their long journey back into their lives.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Health
- Year
- 2010
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 28
- Paragraph text
- In 1990, the General Assembly adopted resolution 45/111, the Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners. Principle 7 states that efforts to abolish solitary confinement as a punishment, or to restrict its use, should be undertaken and encouraged.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 75
- Paragraph text
- The protocol should contain guidance on the right to free legal assistance. Many States regrettably still lack the resources and capacity necessary to provide legal aid (see the United Nations Principles and Guidelines on Access to Legal Aid in Criminal Justice Systems). In the absence of a sufficient number of certified lawyers and a full-fledged legal aid system covering all stages of deprivation of liberty, authorities should, as an interim measure, grant detainees the right to have a trusted third party present during questioning during initial custody (see CAT/OP/BEN/1). The United Nations Principles and Guidelines on Access to Legal Aid in Criminal Justice Systems, while asserting that lawyers are the first providers of legal aid, confirm that other stakeholders, including non-governmental organizations, community-based organizations, professional bodies and associations and academic institutions, may step in to fulfil this function.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 86
- Paragraph text
- Recording should not be limited to confessions or other incriminating statements. Whatever the format, several elements must be recorded during an interview, including: its place, date, time and duration; the intervals between sessions; the identity of the interviewers and any other persons present and any changes in individuals present during questioning (see Human Rights Council resolution 31/31); confirmation that the interviewee was informed of his or her rights and availed himself or herself of the opportunity to exercise them and confirmation of any voluntary waiver; the substance and content of questions asked and answers, in addition to any other information, provided by the interviewer or interviewers or the suspect (see the Luanda Guidelines, guideline 9 (e)); and the time and reasons for any interruption and time of resumption of the interview (rules of procedure and evidence of the International Criminal Court, rule 112 (1)).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 85
- Paragraph text
- Suspect interviews must be at least audio, and preferably video, recorded (see A/HRC/4/33/Add.3 and A/68/295). Video recorders should capture the entire interview room, including all persons present. Video recording discourages torture while providing an authentic and complete record that can be reviewed during the investigation and used for training purposes. It cannot, however, be used as an alternative to the presence of counsel (see CAT/C/AUT/CO/3 and A/HRC/25/60/Add.1). The Special Rapporteur acknowledges the financial implications associated with the use of video-recording equipment. The protocol may explore alternative solutions, such as limiting the mandatory use of audiovisual recording to interviews of suspects, vulnerable victims or witnesses.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Humanitarian
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 76
- Paragraph text
- Persons arrested or detained on criminal charges must be informed of their right to remain silent during questioning by law enforcement in accordance with article 14 (3) (g) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This right is inherent to the presumption of innocence and key to torture prevention efforts, given that interviewers respecting this right are unlikely to resort to abusive questioning methods. Suspects must be duly warned, at the beginning of every interview, that their words may be used in evidence against them. Persons' willing agreement to provide statements during questioning following this warning cannot be regarded as a fully informed choice when they were not expressly notified of the right to remain silent or when the decision was taken without the assistance of counsel (see European Court of Human Rights, Stojkovic v. France and Belgium).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 72
- Paragraph text
- Where a person waives the right to counsel, means of verification should be employed to ensure that he or she received clear and sufficient information about the content of the right and the potential consequence of a waiver and to establish that the waiver was voluntary and unequivocal (see the United Nations Principles and Guidelines on Access to Legal Aid in Criminal Justice Systems). When a person invoked the right to assistance of counsel during questioning, a waiver cannot be established by evidence that he or she responded to further questioning in the absence of counsel, even if formerly advised of his or her right to remain silent. In such situations, the interview cannot continue until the assistance of counsel is actualized, unless the interviewee initiates further communication with interviewers (see European Court of Human Rights, Pishchalnikov v. Russia).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Sep 21, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 1
- Paragraph text
- In the past, the Special Rapporteur and other mechanisms against torture, including some of the most important treaty-based monitoring mechanisms,1have focused predominantly on preventing the use of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in “custodial” settings, that is, once persons have been arrested, interned, imprisonedor otherwise deprived of their liberty. The extent to which and how the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is applied to the use of force by State agents outside custodial settings (“extra-custodial” use of force) has not yet been systematically examined. This question is particularly relevant where State agents resort to unnecessary, excessive or otherwise unlawful force without necessarily infringing the right to life, for example, during arrest, stop andsearch or crowd control operations. While States must be in a position to use all lawful and appropriate means, including necessary and proportionate force, with a view to maintaining public security and law and order, experience shows that the use of force in insufficiently controlled environments carries a significant risk of arbitrariness and abuse. In his most recent report to the Human Rights Council (A/HRC/34/54), the Special Rapporteur expressed his intention to examine how the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment should be applied and interpreted in extra-custodial settings, particularly in view of potential justifications such as law enforcement, public security, crowd control or self-defence and the defence of others. The Special Rapporteur also expressed his intention to examine the extent to which the use of certain types of weapons, riot control devices or other means and methods of law enforcement would have to be considered intrinsically cruel, inhuman or degrading in the light of their immediate to long-term consequences.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 16
- Paragraph text
- It should be noted that the above-mentioned principles govern the use of force, not only in extra-custodial settings, but also where riots, unrest or other violent incidents occur within places of detention. 20 Depending on the circumstances, they may also be relevant in determining the permissibility of invasive health and security procedures, such as the taking of bodily samples or a strip search. 21 In their relations with persons deprived of their liberty, law enforcement officials may not use force, except when strictly necessary for the maintenance of security and order within the institution or when personal safety is threatened, and they may not use firearms, except in self-defence or in the defence of others against the immediate threat of death or serious injury or when strictly necessary to prevent the escape of an inmate presenting a threat of death or serious injury.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 18
- Paragraph text
- The absolute and non-derogable character of the prohibition entails that any use of force amounting to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is conclusively unlawful and cannot be j ustified under any circumstances, 25 whereas the peremptory character of the prohibition of torture means that any contradicting national administrative act or legislation, international agreement or judicial decision is automatically devoid of any legal effect.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 5
- Paragraph text
- Apart from prohibiting the arbitrary deprivation of life and providing a few principles on the lawful use of lethal force, human rights treaties do not expressly regulate the extra-custodial use of force. 4 Instead, the contemporary legal principles governing the use of force by law enforcement officials (“use of force principles”) have been derived primarily from State practice and the application and interpretation of these very general treaty provisions in case law. The principles have been restated in two soft law instruments, namely, the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials and the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, and today can be regarded as general principles of law. 5 In particular, the use of force by State agents is governed by the following cumulative principles: • Legality: any use of force must have a legal basis and pursue a lawful purpose . 6 • Necessity: force must only be used when, and to the extent, strictly necessary for the achievement of a lawful purpose. 7 • Proportionality: the harm likely to be inflicted by the use of force must not be excessive compared to the benefit of the lawful purpose pursued. 8 • Precaution: law enforcement operations must be planned, prepared and conducted so as to minimize, to the greatest extent possible, the resort to force and, whenever it becomes unavoidable, to minimize the resulting harm.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 19
- Paragraph text
- States have a corollary obligation to take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment within their jurisdiction. 26 Wherever there is reasonable ground to believe that extra-custodial force amounting to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment has been used, States have a duty to conduct a prompt and impartial investigation in order to ensure full accountability for any such act, including, as appropriate, administrative, civil and criminal accountability, and to ensure that victims receive adequate redress and rehabilitation.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 17
- Paragraph text
- The absolute and non-derogable prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment has been codified in a wide range of universal and regional instruments 22 and today is universally recognized as a core principle of customary international law. 23 The prohibition of torture is also one of the few norms of customary international law that is universally recognized as having attained peremptory status (jus cogens). Furthermore, the prohibition of torture, cruel, humiliating and degrading treatment “at any time and in any place whatsoever” is also included in article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, which the International Court of Justice has held to reflect a general principle of law, namely, “elementary considerations of humanity”.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 4
- Paragraph text
- Building on the work undertaken by his predecessors and other mandate holders and mechanisms, the Special Rapporteur conducted extensive research and broad stakeholder consultations with academic experts and representatives of governments, international organizations and civil society organizations, including through a multi-stakeholder expert meeting held in Geneva on 1 and 2 May 2017 and a general call for submissions in response to a thematic questionnaire posted on the website of the Office of the United Nations High Commissio ner for Human Rights from 29 May to 30 June 2017. 3 The present report reflects the resulting conclusions and recommendations of the Special Rapporteur.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 13
- Paragraph text
- In particular, States should thoroughly train their police forces to avoid situations in which the use of force will become inevitable and equip them with various methods and types of weapons and ammunition allowing for a differentiated use of force, including “less lethal” incapacitating weapons and self-defensive equipment such as shields, helmets, bulletproof vests and bulletproof means of transportation. Moreover, law enforcement officials must constantly re-evaluate the situation with a view to avoiding unnecessary or excessive use of force. Whenever the use of force becomes unavoidable, law enforcement officials must ensure that assistance and medical aid is provided to any injured or affected persons at the earliest possible moment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 11
- Paragraph text
- A proportionality assessment must always be made in the light of the circumstances of each case. As a general rule, potentially lethal force must not be used except where strictly necessary to: (a) defend any person against the imminent threat of death or serious injury; (b) prevent the perpetration o f a particularly serious crime involving grave threat to life; or (c) arrest a person presenting such a danger or prevent their escape. Intentionally lethal force may only be used when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life from an unlawful attack. 15 For example, even the aim of lawful arrest cannot justify the use of firearms to stop a thief or pickpocket not otherwise posing a threat to life and limb. In such cases, considerations of proportionality require that the risk of the suspect escaping arre st is to be preferred over the risk of causing the suspect’s death or serious injury. Other factors that may be relevant in evaluating the degree of force that is proportionate include the individual’s behaviour, age, gender and health.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 9
- Paragraph text
- The principle of necessity has a qualitative, a quantitative and a temporal aspect. In qualitative terms, any use of force must be “unavoidable” in the sense that non-violent or other less harmful means remain ineffective or without any promise of achieving the desired purpose. 12 In quantitative terms, whenever the use of force is unavoidable, the degree to which and the manner in which force is employed may not be more harmful than strictly necessary. 13 Finally, in temporal terms, the use of force is unlawful if, at the moment of its application, it is not yet or no longer unavoidable to achieve the desired lawful purpose. Therefore, any law enforcement operation involving the use of force requires a constant reassessment of its necessity to achieve the desired purpose. Should the circumstances evolve so as to permit the achievement of that purpose through less harmful means, force may no longer be used.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 6
- Paragraph text
- In order for the use of force by State agents to be lawful, full adherence to all of the above principles is required.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 10
- Paragraph text
- While the principle of necessity requires a factual assessment of t he least harmful means that can be expected to achieve the desired purpose, the principle of proportionality involves an additional and separate value judgment as to whether the harm expected to result from the use of force can be justified in the light of the benefit of the desired purpose. Even if force is necessary for the achievement of that purpose, it can only be permissible if the resulting harm remains proportionate compared to the seriousness of the offence and the importance of the desired purpose. 14 Thus, irrespective of considerations of necessity, the requirement of proportionality defines an absolute upper limit for the force that might be permissible to achieve a specific lawful purpose (A/HRC/26/36, para. 66). The “harm” to be weighed in the proportionality assessment does not necessarily have to be of physical nature, but can also involve mental suffering and emotions of humiliation and distress.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 20
- Paragraph text
- Torture has been defined in many universal and regional instruments, albeit not always in precisely identical terms.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 14
- Paragraph text
- In practice, the required standard of precaution does not impose an unrealistic burden but always relates to what is reasonably possible in the circumstances.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 3
- Paragraph text
- While the present report is focused on the extra-custodial use of force by State agents, its conclusions generally will also be relevant, mutatis mutandis, for non-physical forms of coercion and for ill-treatment committed by non-State actors. Owing to constraints of time and space, the Special Rapporteur intends to more systematically consider those issues in subsequent thematic reports. Moreover, in the present report the extra-custodial use of force under the law enforcement paradigm both in peacetime and in armed conflict is covered, but the use of force as a means of warfare under the hostilities paradigm is not examined. The terms “State agent” and “law enforcement official” will be used interchangeably to denote any person exercising, de jure or de facto, public authority on behalf of the State, whether of military or civilian status and whether appointed, elected, employed or contracted, including private security personnel. 2 Finally, the implications of the extra-custodial use of force are examined in the present report under human rights law only, and not under potentially applicable international humanitarian law.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 12
- Paragraph text
- Even if the use of force is necessary and proportionate in the immediate circumstances of a case, it may nonetheless be unlawful if it results from a failure to plan, organize and control operations so as to minimize harm, respect and pr eserve human life and avoid any excessive use of force.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 15
- Paragraph text
- Applying the principles of legality, necessity, proportionality and precaution to the particular context of policing assemblies, any decision to forcibly disperse a peaceful assembly or protest must be taken with due regard to the freedoms of assembly and of expression. In particular, article 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides that “no restrictions may be placed on the exercise of [the right to peaceful assembly] other than those imposed in conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order (ordre public), the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others”. Moreover, it must be emphasized that individuals cannot lose their protection against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment under any circumstances whatsoever, including in the context of violent riots or unlawful protests.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 7
- Paragraph text
- According to the principle of legality, any use of force by State agents must pursue a lawful purpose and must be based on and regulated by national law. 10 Lawful purposes typically include effecting the arrest or preventing the escape of a person suspected of having committed a crime, self-defence or defence of others against an unlawful threat of death or serious injury, or dispersing violent assemblies. A further parameter of legality is the equal treatment of all persons before the law in accordance with the principle of non-discrimination (see A/HRC/26/36, para. 74, and A/HRC/31/66, para. 15). States must provide express authority for the use of force in their national law and must regulate the matter in line with their obligations under international law.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 8
- Paragraph text
- The principle of necessity requires that any use of force by State agents must be restricted to the least harmful means that can reasonably be expected to achieve the purpose pursued. Thus, law enforcement officials must apply non -violent means whenever possible and may use force only when, and only to the extent, strictly necessary to achieve a lawful purpose.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Commissions of inquiry 2012, para. 19
- Paragraph text
- In the international human rights context, commissions of inquiry are independent investigative commissions created in response to human rights violations including, but not limited to, torture, genocide, extrajudicial killings, disappearances and incidents involving multiple or high-profile killings (A/HRC/8/3, para. 12). Most commissions of inquiry are established at the initiative of national Government authorities. International experts may be part of their composition. In the present report, commissions of inquiry are defined as national commissions of inquiry and truth commissions, as well as investigations undertaken by national human rights institutions. The quest for accountability and victims' rights are common denominators for commissions of inquiry and truth commissions. While a commission of inquiry is likely to be established at the height of violence, a truth commission may only be established once a conflict is over. Both national and international commissions of inquiry often result from concerted demands by civil society or the international community. International commissions of inquiry tend, however, to have comparatively briefer temporal mandates which seek to identify patterns of violations during a protracted period of armed conflict.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 51
- Paragraph text
- The revision of the Rules offers a good opportunity to insist on the obligation of authorities to ensure free, fair and transparent access to a facility's medical services by providing a sufficient number of qualified, independent physicians in all facilities. The Rules should insist on the obligation to guarantee the availability of prompt, impartial, adequate and consensual medical and psychological examination upon the admission of each detainee. Medical examinations should also be provided when an inmate is taken out of the place of detention for any investigative activity, upon transfer or release and in response to allegations or suspicion of torture or other ill-treatment. Likewise, medical examinations must take place if a victim makes a complaint or upon his or her lawyer's motion, subject to judicial review in the event of delay or refusal. It is essential that medical examinations be conducted in a setting that is free of any surveillance and in full confidentiality, except for when the presence of prison staff is requested by the medical personnel. Health personnel must be free from any interference, pressure, intimidation or orders from detention authorities.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment 2016, para. 20
- Paragraph text
- Women are at particular risk of torture and ill-treatment during pretrial detention because sexual abuse and violence may be used as a means of coercion and to extract confessions. A majority of female detainees worldwide are first-time offenders suspected of or charged with non-violent (drug- or property-related) crimes, yet are automatically sent to pretrial detention. In many States the number of women held in pretrial detention is equivalent to or higher than that of convicted female prisoners, and women are held in pretrial detention for extremely long periods (A/68/340). Women in pretrial detention facilities - which are typically not built or managed in a gender-sensitive manner - tend not to have access to specialized health care and educational or vocational training. They face higher risks of sexual assault and violence when they are held in facilities with convicted offenders and men or are supervised by male guards. According to the Committee against Torture, the undue prolongation of the pretrial stage of detention represents a form of cruel treatment, even if the victim is not detained (A/53/44).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Gender
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Women
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 19
- Paragraph text
- The prohibition of torture is absolute and non-derogable, meaning that "no exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture". The prohibition of torture must not be limited or balanced against any other right or concern, and States are not permitted to derogate from their obligations even in times of emergency or armed conflict (see A/HRC/13/39/Add.5, paras. 41-42). Likewise, the prohibition of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is considered to be non-derogable and, therefore, must be observed in all circumstances. The gravity of torture also finds expression in the attendant obligations on States to adopt effective legislative, administrative, judicial and/or other measures to prevent acts of torture or other ill-treatment in any territory under their jurisdiction, the obligation to criminalize acts of torture, and the customary international law obligation to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other ill-treatment as codified, inter alia, in the Convention.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Certain forms of abuses in health-care settings that may cross a threshold of mistreatment that is tantamount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2013, para. 64
- Paragraph text
- The mandate continues to receive reports of the systematic use of forced interventions worldwide. Both this mandate and United Nations treaty bodies have established that involuntary treatment and other psychiatric interventions in health-care facilities are forms of torture and ill-treatment. Forced interventions, often wrongfully justified by theories of incapacity and therapeutic necessity inconsistent with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, are legitimized under national laws, and may enjoy wide public support as being in the alleged "best interest" of the person concerned. Nevertheless, to the extent that they inflict severe pain and suffering, they violate the absolute prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment (A/63/175, paras. 38, 40, 41). Concern for the autonomy and dignity of persons with disabilities leads the Special Rapporteur to urge revision of domestic legislation allowing for forced interventions.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- Persons with disabilities
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 52
- Paragraph text
- In Georgia, the Special Rapporteur received allegations that victims were encouraged by the prosecution to agree to plea-bargaining agreements without acknowledging their ill-treatment by the police.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 46
- Paragraph text
- Case law thus suggests that the criteria determining whether the extra-custodial use of force amounts to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment are closely aligned with the use of force principles. In principle, any use of force by State agents exceeding what is necessary and proportionate in the circumstances to achieve a lawful purpose is regarded as an attack on human dignity amounting to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of whether that excess occurred intentionally or inadvertently. The precise characterization of the relevant ill-treatment as cruel, inhuman, degrading or a combination thereof will depend on the particular characteristics and circumstances of the case but cannot prevent the unlawfulness of the act. Moreover, failure to take all precautions practically possible in the planning, preparation and conduct of law enforcement operations increases the risk of unnecessary or disproportionate force being used and, in principle, breaches the State’s obligation to prevent cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 11
- Paragraph text
- A proportionality assessment must always be made in the light of the circumstances of each case. As a general rule, potentially lethal force must not be used except where strictly necessary to: (a) defend any person against the imminent threat of death or serious injury; (b) prevent the perpetration of a particularly serious crime involving grave threat to life; or (c) arrest a person presenting such a danger or prevent their escape. Intentionally lethal force may only be used when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life from an unlawful attack. For example, even the aim of lawful arrest cannot justify the use of firearms to stop a thief or pickpocket not otherwise posing a threat to life and limb. In such cases, considerations of proportionality require that the risk of the suspect escaping arrest is to be preferred over the risk of causing the suspect’s death or serious injury. Other factors that may be relevant in evaluating the degree of force that is proportionate include the individual’s behaviour, age, gender and health.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 62c
- Paragraph text
- [In the present report, the Special Rapporteur examined whether and in which circumstances the extra-custodial use of force by State agents amounts to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The Special Rapporteur’s substantive conclusions can be summarized as follows:] Any extra-custodial use of force that does not pursue a lawful purpose (legality), or that is unnecessary for the achievement of a lawful purpose (necessity), or that inflicts excessive harm compared to the purpose pursued (proportionality) contradicts established international legal principles governing the use of force by law enforcement officials and amounts to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Moreover, failure to take all precautions practically possible in the planning, preparation and conduct of law enforcement operations with a view to avoiding the unnecessary, excessive or otherwise unlawful use of force contravenes the State’s positive obligation to prevent acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment within its jurisdiction;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 48
- Paragraph text
- While the lawfulness of specific weapons and other means of warfare has long been regulated in international humanitarian law, it has more recently also become an issue of consideration under human rights law with regard to the wider context of law enforcement. It is increasingly recognized that certain weapons and other means of law enforcement may be inherently cruel, inhuman or degrading by nature or design and, accordingly, that their use, production and trade would be incompatible with the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (General Assembly resolution 66/150, para. 24, and resolution 68/156, para. 30). Ever since the establishment of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur, mandate holders have expressed concern in this respect, starting in the very first report of the Special Rapporteur to the Commission on Human Rights, in 1986 (E/CN.4/1986/15, paras. 120-121), but most notably in a report prepared at the express request of the Commission in 2003 (E/CN.4/2003/69).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 25
- Paragraph text
- Although all major universal and regional human rights treaties expressly prohibit cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment, none of them offers a definition of the term as a whole or of its components (namely, “cruel”, “inhuman” and “degrading”). The concept has been interpreted and applied in a wide range of cases before judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, albeit with varying precision. Thus, for example, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights indicated that “inhumane treatment includes unjustifiable conduct that causes severe physical, mental or psychological pain or suffering, and that treatment or punishment of an individual may be degrading if he is severely humiliated in front of others or he is compelled to act against his wishes or conscience”, whereas the Human Rights Committee did not “consider it necessary to draw up a list of prohibited acts or to establish sharp distinctions between the different kinds of punishment or treatment; the distinctions depend on the nature, purpose and severity of the treatment applied”.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 33
- Paragraph text
- It is crucial to recognize explicitly the absolute prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in all circumstances. Such an explicit recognition should be included both in the preamble and, through a revision, in Rule 6, dealing with respect for inmates' inherent dignity and value as human beings. As a widely recognized set of rules addressing the administration of penal institutions, the Rules should explicitly condemn torture and ill-treatment, including participation, complicity, incitement and attempts, and certain conduct that amounts to ill-treatment, whether committed by public officials, by other persons acting on behalf of the State or by private persons (Convention against Torture, art. 4). The Rules should also declare unambiguously that no exceptional circumstances whatsoever may be relied upon to justify acts of torture and other ill-treatment by public officials, that offenders will not be tolerated and that offenders will be subject to prosecution. Naming and defining this crime will promote the aim of the Convention against Torture, inter alia, by alerting everyone to the special gravity of the crime of torture (see Committee against Torture general comment No. 2, paras. 5 and 11).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 24
- Paragraph text
- States around the world continue to use solitary confinement extensively (see A/63/175, para. 78). In some countries, the use of Super Maximum Security Prisons to impose solitary confinement as a normal, rather than an "exceptional", practice for inmates is considered problematic. In the United States, for example, it is estimated that between 20,000 and 25,000 individuals are being held in isolation. Another example is the extensive use of solitary confinement in relation to pretrial detention, which for many years has been an integral part of the Scandinavian prison practice. Some form of isolation from the general prison population is used almost everywhere as punishment for breaches of prison discipline. Many States now use solitary confinement more routinely and for longer durations. For example, in Brazil, Law 10792 of 2003, amending the existing "Law of Penal Execution", contemplates a "differentiated" disciplinary regime in an individual cell for up to 360 days, without prejudice to extensions of similar length for new offences and up to one sixth of the prison term. In 2010, the Province of Buenos Aires in Argentina instituted a Programme of Prevention of Violent Behaviour in its prisons which consists of isolation for a minimum of nine months (the initial three months in full isolation), a term that - according to prison monitors - is frequently extended.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment from an extraterritorial perspective 2015, para. 57
- Paragraph text
- The obligation to provide an effective remedy applies "irrespective of who may ultimately be the bearer of responsibility for the violation", which is essential to ensuring that all persons, including migrants and non-citizens, are afforded their fundamental rights without discrimination. States' obligations to provide redress are both substantive and procedural, wherein States must establish judicial or administrative bodies capable of determining a torture victim's right to redress, awarding such redress and ensuring accessibility of these forums to victims (A/69/277). In the case of migrants, the recommended principles and guidelines on human rights at international borders developed by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights note States' obligation to afford remedies against removal orders where there are substantial grounds for believing that the persons removed would be at a risk of torture or other ill-treatment if "returned to, readmitted, or subject to onward return to a place where they might be at such risk" (guidelines 9), and further to ensure that torture and ill-treatment survivors are referred to proper rehabilitation services.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Movement
- Person(s) affected
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 43
- Paragraph text
- It is well established that the term "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" must be interpreted to extend the widest possible protection against abuses (see the Body of Principles). When persons are deprived of liberty, the prohibition of torture and ill-treatment overlaps with and is supplemented by the principle of humane treatment of detainees (see A/68/295). The European Court of Human Rights, in Bouyid v. Belgium, has highlighted the inherent link between concepts of degrading treatment or punishment and human dignity, finding that treatment that "humiliates or debases an individual, show[s] a lack of respect for or diminish[es] his or her human dignity, or arouses feelings of fear, anguish or inferiority capable of breaking an individual's moral and physical resistance" may be characterized as degrading. Any act by law enforcement that diminishes a person's human dignity, including the use of physical force when not strictly necessitated by his or her conduct, violates the prohibition of torture and ill treatment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Certain forms of abuses in health-care settings that may cross a threshold of mistreatment that is tantamount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2013, para. 6e
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur calls upon all States to:] Safeguard free and informed consent on an equal basis for all individuals without any exception, through legal framework and judicial and administrative mechanisms, including through policies and practices to protect against abuses. Any legal provisions to the contrary, such as provisions allowing confinement or compulsory treatment in mental health settings, including through guardianship and other substituted decision-making, must be revised. Adopt policies and protocols that uphold autonomy, self-determination and human dignity. Ensure that information on health is fully available, acceptable, accessible and of good quality; and that it is imparted and comprehended by means of supportive and protective measures such as a wide range of community-based services and supports (A/64/272, para. 93). Instances of treatment without informed consent should be investigated; redress to victims of such treatment should be provided;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 54
- Paragraph text
- International standards on the investigation of torture allegations and reports are primarily formulated as obligations of States. However, legal professionals play a crucial and active role in the documentation and investigation of torture, by, inter alia, documenting torture for use in legal proceedings and recording the failure to investigate in spite of the availability of evidence or the shortcomings of any investigations undertaken. Lawyers must assess whether the official investigation undertaken by police or other competent body took into account proper medical evidence or arrangements for independent medical examinations to attest to the victim's version of the events are needed. Understanding the physical and psychological effects of torture is vital when lawyers interview victims with a view to submitting criminal, civil or administrative claims, as well as when defending a victim of torture who was forced to incriminate him or herself under torture. Failure to raise such issues when there is prima facie evidence of ill-treatment is a breach of professional ethics and competency. Securing the services of experts to examine evidence, to advise counsel and to testify at trial is critical.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Commissions of inquiry 2012, para. 67
- Paragraph text
- Hearings that are open to the public, like those pioneered by the truth and reconciliation commissions created in South Africa and Peru, are strongly preferred. Open hearings where victims and witnesses may speak directly to the public in their own voices are crucial to building understanding and trust in the public in the methodology used by the commission of inquiry. At the same time, it is important that open hearings be conducted in a manner that respects the dignity of each victim and witness, and protects the rights of alleged perpetrators, in the criminal law setting, from any breach in the presumption of innocence. The preference for open hearings should be without prejudice to some exceptions made for testimony to be received in camera, as required, for example, to ensure confidentiality and the security of victims or witnesses or when there are legitimate claims of national security interests. Under no circumstances should "secrets of State" be invoked as a justification to conceal the commission of human rights violations. The members of the commission of inquiry should alone be the judges of whether confidential or closed proceedings are necessary. Only in exceptional circumstances should hearings be confidential; in such cases, the precise justification for the confidentiality must be transparent and disclosed to the public.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The death penalty and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 2012, para. 67
- Paragraph text
- In his partly dissenting opinion to the decision in the case Ocalan v. Turkey (2005), Judge Lech Garlicki stated that article 3 had been violated because any imposition of the death penalty represented per se inhuman and degrading treatment prohibited by the Convention. Thus, while correct, the majority's conclusion that the imposition of the death penalty following an unfair trial represented a violation of article 3 of the European Convention seemed to him to stop short of addressing the real problem. He drew attention to the 2002 opinion of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in which it recalled that, in its most recent resolutions, it had reaffirmed its beliefs that the application of the death penalty constituted inhuman and degrading punishment and a violation of the most fundamental right, that to life itself, and that capital punishment had no place in civilized, democratic societies governed by the rule of law. Judge Garlicki stated that, in consequence, the only question that remained was whether the Court had the power to state the obvious truth, namely, that capital punishment had become an inhuman and degrading punishment per se.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The death penalty and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 2012, para. 28
- Paragraph text
- At first glance, the language in article 1, paragraph 1, of the Convention against Torture appears to carve out an exception under which pain or suffering stemming from lawful sanctions categorically cannot be torture. Yet, this reading of article 1 is belied by extensive treaty body authority findings of a violation of the prohibition in article 1 with regard to various forms of lawful corporal punishment. The proper understanding is that the exclusion refers to sanctions that are lawful under both national and international law. Since it is widely accepted that corporal punishment at least amounts to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, it does not qualify as a lawful sanction and, accordingly, is not immune from being categorized as torture. As far back as 1988, the Special Rapporteur appointed to examine questions relevant to torture stated that it was international law, not domestic law, which ultimately determined whether a certain practice might be regarded as lawful, and that practices which might initially be considered lawful might become outlawed and viewed as the most serious violations of human rights (E/CN.4/1988/17, paras. 42 and 44).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 39
- Paragraph text
- There is a tendency to draw a clear distinction between the judicial and the executive use of tainted information by some domestic courts. The latter is often allowed, the argument being, inter alia, that it does not impinge upon the liberty of individuals or that, when it does, as relating to powers of arrest, it is usually of short duration. Alternatively, that argument may refer to the "ticking-bomb scenario", i.e., that the executive agencies cannot be expected to close their eyes to information at the cost of endangering the lives of the citizens of their own countries. In other words, courts tend to endorse the use of information acquired through torture or other ill-treatment by the executive agencies in all phases of operations, except in judicial proceedings. In fact, some courts have ruled that the executive agencies have no responsibility to examine the conditions under which information was obtained, or to change their decisions accordingly. They have also ruled that it is not for the courts to discipline the executive agencies, unless by way of a criminal prosecution, and that their jurisdiction only exists to preserve the integrity of the trial process.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Overview of working methods and vision 2011, para. 49
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur reiterates that efforts to combat torture require a more victim-centred perspective that seeks an integrated long-term approach to adequate redress and reparation, including compensation and rehabilitation for victims of torture and their families. He recommends that the perspectives of victims of torture be included in the development of programmes and policies aimed at addressing torture. In that respect, the Special Rapporteur reiterates the importance of a victim-centred approach to dealing with victims and survivors of torture. Similarly, he believes that victims have an important role to play as interested parties in holding torturers accountable for their actions. Indeed, the criminal procedures of some States are more hospitable than others to this engagement by victims; nevertheless, without undermining defendants' rights to all guarantees of a fair trial, victims should be allowed to participate actively in attempts to hold torturers accountable. Efforts to provide assistance to victims must seek to recognize and validate the traumatising experience of torture they have suffered, prevent further isolation by reintegrating them into society, and address the fundamental aim of torture which is, often, to isolate and engender fear in victims in order to break their will.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Families
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 60
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur welcomes recent initiatives by some States to establish and publish guidelines for their intelligence services and commitments they have made not to participate in, solicit, encourage or condone the use of torture or other ill-treatment for any purpose, to the extent that they accord with their international legal obligations. However, some aspects of published guidelines fall short of the standards required by the prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment. If a real risk of torture or ill-treatment is detected, a State must not proceed to work with a foreign agency. Any discretion afforded in the guidelines to executive actors to proceed to work with an agency, despite a real risk of the information they receive being tainted by torture or ill-treatment, is incompatible with the obligation of the State as to the prohibition of torture. In addition, no distinction between torture and other ill-treatment should be made. Likewise, the excuse of exceptional circumstances contained in some national guidelines is inconsistent with the prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 86
- Paragraph text
- The setting up of a national preventive mechanism requires a careful preparatory process that is to be "public, inclusive and transparent", including civil society and all other actors involved in the prevention of torture, as in Honduras and Paraguay. A transparent and inclusive preparatory process creates greater public attention for the future national preventive mechanism, ensuring its credibility, and may prevent problems after its designation. Many States seek assistance from various specialized institutions in the field of torture prevention and from the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and OHCHR for the process of setting up national preventive mechanisms. The Special Rapporteur has continuously offered his assistance in this regard and encourages States to further avail themselves of the mandate. As the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture has indicated, the development of a national preventive mechanism "should be considered an ongoing obligation, with reinforcement of formal aspects and working methods refined and improved incrementally". In that regard, the adoption, as in Costa Rica and Maldives, of clear and ambitious action plans defining the goals and strategies of the national preventive mechanism is useful.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Commissions of inquiry 2012, para. 78
- Paragraph text
- Commissions of inquiry into torture and other forms of ill-treatment are strong and flexible mechanisms that can yield substantial benefits for Governments, victim communities and the wider public. Unlike other mechanisms commonly engaged in the aftermath of allegations of torture and other forms of ill-treatment, such as criminal investigations and prosecutions, commissions of inquiry provide unique opportunities for a deeper understanding of the underlying context in which violations were committed, review of governmental policies, practices and institutional shortcomings, truth-telling and contributing to the healing of victim communities, and independent expert recommendations on reparation and guarantees of non-repetition. Commissions of inquiry can also play an integral role in providing impetus and eventually facilitating the formal investigation of current systems or legacies of torture and other forms of ill-treatment, and pave the way to effective and fair prosecutions. In these ways, commissions of inquiry may aid States in the fulfilment of their international legal obligations when allegations of torture and other forms of ill-treatment arise. However, in the absence of judicial mechanisms, a commission of inquiry alone will not satisfy a State's obligations.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Certain forms of abuses in health-care settings that may cross a threshold of mistreatment that is tantamount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2013, para. 42
- Paragraph text
- Compulsory treatment programmes that consist primarily of physical disciplinary exercises, often including military-style drills, disregard medical evidence (A/65/255, paras. 31, 34). According to the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), "neither detention nor forced labour have been recognized by science as treatment for drug use disorders". Such detention - frequently without medical evaluation, judicial review or right of appeal - offers no evidence-based or effective treatment. Detention and forced labour programmes therefore violate international human rights law and are illegitimate substitutes for evidence-based measures, such as substitution therapy, psychological interventions and other forms of treatment given with full, informed consent (A/65/255, para. 31). The evidence shows that this arbitrary and unjustified detention is frequently accompanied by - and is the setting for - egregious physical and mental abuse.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 29
- Paragraph text
- According to medical ethical standards, health professionals have the obligation not to participate actively or passively in torture or other ill-treatment. No obligation to a third party can override the duty to protect the individual from torture or other ill-treatment and to report such cases. The World Medical Association has held that health professionals should be made aware of their ethical obligations, including the need to report torture and other ill-treatment, to maintain confidentiality and to seek the consent of victims prior to examination. Victims must be fully informed, in words they can understand, about the risks and benefits of reporting allegations of torture and other ill-treatment to the relevant authorities and consent to it. The Association has consistently reiterated its policy on the responsibility of physicians to denounce acts of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment of which they are aware. It urges national medical associations to speak out in support of these fundamental principles of medical ethics and to investigate any breach of these principles by their members.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 51
- Paragraph text
- During country visits, the Special Rapporteur observed that, in addition to the lack of competent forensic experts and health professionals, the legal profession often lacks capacity and knowledge to apply such evidence adequately. One reason for the low impact of forensic reports on torture is the gap between scientists and judicial authorities. Prosecutors and judges are often unable to evaluate adequately forensic evidence because of its complexity or often substitute their own reasoning for that of the expert's. This constitutes a major limitation to the effectiveness of forensic evidence and can only be eliminated through the training of judges and prosecutors on the effective forensic documentation of torture and other ill-treatment and on evidence that can be used in legal proceedings. Specifically, prosecutors and judges, as well as health professionals, must be trained on the Istanbul Protocol and other relevant materials. In addition, it is key to bring together authorities and civil society representatives with established forensic experts to promote forensic capacity-building and professional development.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Overview of working methods and vision 2011, para. 71
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur thanks the Human Rights Council for the confidence bestowed upon him by appointing him Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. He looks forward to constructive and open dialogue with the Council with the aim of furthering the universally shared interest in eradicating torture and ill-treatment worldwide. He calls for a redoubling of efforts by the mandate of Special Rapporteur, States, civil society and treaty bodies to achieve this goal. It is the view of the Special Rapporteur that it will also require, at times, some difficult and hard choices. Similarly, the implementation of his mandate will, inevitably, raise differences of opinion with regard to the substance, interpretation and approach, all of which may cause some discomfort for some States; however, the brutal nature of torture requires that all parties work quickly and constructively to address these mutual concerns. The Special Rapporteur intends to point out challenges fairly and objectively, and to acknowledge progress where it exists while working diligently with stakeholders to achieve a world without torture. He urges States to approach this difficult issue in a spirit of openness and good faith as he himself will do.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Overview of main observations of five years fact-finding and research 2010, para. 45
- Paragraph text
- The magnitude of impunity has been one of - if not the most - disappointing findings of his tenure as Special Rapporteur. Impunity is almost total in most countries he has visited, despite undeniable, sometimes routine, widespread or even systematic practices of torture and in contravention of the clear obligation under the Convention against Torture to hold perpetrators of torture accountable under criminal law. As soon as there is a suspicion of torture or an explicit allegation, a thorough investigation should be initiated immediately or without any delay. It therefore has to be ensured that all public officials, in particular prison doctors, prison officials and magistrates who have reasons to suspect an act of torture or ill-treatment do report ex officio to the relevant authorities for proper investigation in accordance with article 12 of the Convention against Torture. Moreover, whereas the decision on whether to conduct an investigation should not be discretionary, but rather an obligation irrespective of the filing of a complaint, this is too often not the case. In addition, the lack of criminalization of torture and the mostly inadequate sanctions are the main factors contributing to impunity.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2010
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Certain forms of abuses in health-care settings that may cross a threshold of mistreatment that is tantamount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2013, para. 73
- Paragraph text
- A particular form of ill-treatment and possibly torture of drug users is the denial of opiate substitution treatment, including as a way of eliciting criminal confessions through inducing painful withdrawal symptoms (A/HRC/10/44 and Corr.1, para. 57). The denial of methadone treatment in custodial settings has been declared to be a violation of the right to be free from torture and ill-treatment in certain circumstances (ibid., para. 71). Similar reasoning should apply to the non-custodial context, particularly in instances where Governments impose a complete ban on substitution treatment and harm reduction measures. The common practice of withholding anti-retroviral treatment from HIV-positive people who use drugs, on the assumption that they will not be capable of adhering to treatment, amounts to cruel and inhuman treatment, given the physical and psychological suffering as the disease progresses; it also constitutes abusive treatment based on unjustified discrimination solely related to health status.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Overview of main observations of five years fact-finding and research 2010, para. 61
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur has received many allegations of excessive violence, during apprehension of a suspect and during demonstrations or public turmoil, including in pre-election and election periods. In many of those cases, people have been peacefully exercising their right to assembly when police or security officers violently dispersed the demonstration by beatings, the use of pepper and tear gas, sound bombs, water cannons, rubber bullets or firearms indiscriminately used on the masses. This all too often has led to persons being injured or killed. Of particular concern are reports of police brutality against vulnerable, disadvantaged groups and minorities. The Special Rapporteur has therefore repeatedly stated that the use of force must be exercised with restraint and only once non-violent means have been exhausted. Law enforcement bodies shall refrain from the use of firearms, except in self-defence or defence of others from an imminent threat of death or serious injury. In this regard, strict rules on the use of force for police and security forces should be applied. Furthermore ways to improve the recording and monitoring of arrests and the control of demonstrations should be explored.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Humanitarian
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Ethnic minorities
- Year
- 2010
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 90
- Paragraph text
- Impunity is one of the root causes of the widespread practice of torture. This was recognized by the international community in the 1980s when adopting the Convention against Torture as the first human rights treaty with detailed obligations to criminalize torture, to establish broad jurisdictional competences, to investigate all allegations or suspicions of torture, and to arrest suspected perpetrators of torture and bring them to justice. In most of the 147 States parties to the Convention against Torture, those legal obligations, deriving from articles 4 to 9, 12 and 13 of the Convention, have not been implemented. States should, first of all, ensure through legislative measures that torture, as defined in article 1 of the Convention, is made a crime with appropriate penalties, which must be applicable on the basis of the principles of territoriality, nationality and universal jurisdiction. Secondly, States shall establish professional authorities to promptly and impartially investigate all allegations and suspicions of torture, with the aim of identifying the perpetrators, including superior officers who ordered or condoned torture, and bringing them to justice.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The death penalty and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 2012, para. 42
- Paragraph text
- The death row phenomenon is a relatively new concept, albeit one that has become firmly established in international jurisprudence. It consists of a combination of circumstances that produce severe mental trauma and physical deterioration in prisoners under sentence of death. Those circumstances include the lengthy and anxiety-ridden wait for uncertain outcomes, isolation, drastically reduced human contact and even the physical conditions in which some inmates are held. Death row conditions are often worse than those for the rest of the prison population, and prisoners on death row are denied many basic human necessities. Examples of current death row conditions around the world include solitary confinement for up to 23 hours a day in small, cramped, airless cells, often under extreme temperatures; inadequate nutrition and sanitation arrangements; limited or non-existent contact with family members and/or lawyers; excessive use of handcuffs or other types of shackles or restraints; physical or verbal abuse; lack of appropriate health care (physical and mental); and denial of access to books, newspapers, exercise, education, employment, or other types of prison activity.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Health
- Water & Sanitation
- Person(s) affected
- Families
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 76
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur asserts that social isolation is contrary to article 10, paragraph 3, of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which states that "The penitentiary system shall comprise treatment of prisoners the essential aim of which shall be their reformation and social rehabilitation" (General Assembly resolution 2200 (XXI), annex). Long periods of isolation do not aid the rehabilitation or re-socialization of detainees (E/CN.4/2006/6/Add.4, para. 48). The adverse acute and latent psychological and physiological effects of prolonged solitary confinement constitute severe mental pain or suffering. Thus the Special Rapporteur concurs with the position taken by the Committee against Torture in its General Comment No. 20 that prolonged solitary confinement amounts to acts prohibited by article 7 of the Covenant, and consequently to an act as defined in article 1 or article 16 of the Convention. For these reasons, the Special Rapporteur reiterates that, in his view, any imposition of solitary confinement beyond 15 days constitutes torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, depending on the circumstances. He calls on the international community to agree to such a standard and to impose an absolute prohibition on solitary confinement exceeding 15 consecutive days.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2011
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Commissions of inquiry 2012, para. 23
- Paragraph text
- The purpose of the present report is to deepen the international community's dialogue on commissions of inquiry and to offer guidance on when such commissions should be created by States in response to patterns or practices of torture and other forms of ill-treatment. When used correctly, a commission of inquiry may be a powerful tool in uncovering and bringing an end to patterns of violations; taking first steps in addressing victims' right to know the truth and identifying reparation measures in consultation with victims; ensuring accountability of State institutions and compliance with international human rights law; and promoting democratic, citizen-driven participation in human rights monitoring. Additionally, commissions of inquiry can play an integral role in facilitating the formal investigation of current systems or legacies of torture and other forms of ill-treatment, and pave the way to effective and fair prosecutions. A wealth of experience has been acquired from commissions of inquiry established within national jurisdictions as well as by the international community in situations in which the discovery and disclosure of the truth is deemed essential to the preservation or restoration of peace and security of nations. Lessons can be drawn from these experiences on what factors lead to successful or unsuccessful commissions of inquiry.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 82
- Paragraph text
- Most fundamentally, States should provide their national preventive mechanism with a clear legal basis specifying its powers and ensuring its complete independence from the State authorities. Regrettably, some States fail to provide their national preventive mechanism with the necessary security and stability. This is the case, for example, in Mali, where no express guarantees or powers foreseen by the Optional Protocol are provided, or in Maldives and Mauritius, where the mandate of the national preventive mechanism is only based on a governmental decree. In order to provide the national preventive mechanism with the stability and authority needed for the execution of its difficult tasks, States parties should enact a specific national law establishing the mechanism, as in France and Luxembourg. That law must be in strict compliance with the Optional Protocol. This includes ensuring its complete functional independence and the complete independence of its staff, which implies that members of the national preventive mechanism must not be representatives of the Government, as is the case in Mali, and must maintain no close personal ties to the authorities to be inspected, as is the case in the Republic of Moldova.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 36
- Paragraph text
- Persons interviewed in connection with their alleged role in a criminal offence must not be compelled to testify against themselves or to confess guilt (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 14 (3) (g)) and investigating authorities may not resort to "any direct or indirect physical or undue psychological pressure" to induce confessions (see Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 32 (2007) on the right to equality before courts and tribunals and to a fair trial (article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights)). Accordingly, the prohibition of torture and ill-treatment is complemented by the prohibition of any form of coercion during the questioning of suspects. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court likewise prohibits "any form of coercion, duress or threat" during investigations (art. 55). The protocol must expressly recognize this prohibition and extend it to interviews of witnesses, victims and other persons in the criminal justice system.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment from an extraterritorial perspective 2015, para. 25
- Paragraph text
- The European Court of Human Rights, in El-Masri, held that a State was responsible for acts performed by foreign officials on its territory with the "acquiescence or connivance of its authorities", imputing to the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia harmful conduct that was "carried out in the presence of [its] officials" and within its jurisdiction". The Court further found that Poland had an obligation to do more than refrain from collaborating with and facilitating the Central Intelligence Agency rendition programme when it knew or ought to have known that detainees would be subject to extraordinary rendition and exposed to a risk of torture or other ill-treatment upon transfer. Even when the Polish authorities did not "know exactly or witness what was happening in the facility", they were required to take measures to ensure that individuals within their jurisdiction were not subjected to mistreatment, including harm administered by private individuals (Abu Zubaydah v. Poland). The State should have taken steps to "inquire into whether [the activities of the Agency] were compatible" with the international legal obligations of Poland and indeed acted to prevent the activities in question (Al Nashiri v. Poland).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment 2016, para. 41
- Paragraph text
- While trafficking is perpetrated primarily by private persons, public officials actively acquiesce in or facilitate trafficking operations, for instance by accepting bribes or inducements and certifying or ignoring unlawful working conditions. Furthermore, whenever States fail to exercise due diligence to protect trafficking victims from the actions of private actors, punish perpetrators or provide remedies, they are acquiescent or complicit in torture or ill-treatment (A/HRC/26/18). This is particularly the case whenever the conduct is systematic or recurrent such that the State knew or ought to have known of it and should have taken steps to prevent it, including criminal prosecution and punishment. States must implement a combination of measures to combat trafficking, of which the duty to penalize and prosecute is just one. In designing measures to protect, support and rehabilitate victims of trafficking, States must consider the age, gender and special needs of victims with a view to protecting women and children from revictimization. The criminalization and detention of trafficking victims for status-related offences and "protective" purposes can also amount to ill-treatment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Women
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment 2016, para. 30
- Paragraph text
- Many States use the criminal justice system as a substitute for weak or non-existent child protection systems, leading to the criminalization and incarceration of disadvantaged girls who pose no risk to society and are instead in need of care and protection by the State. The Special Rapporteur recalls that the deprivation of liberty of children is inextricably linked with ill-treatment and must be a measure of last resort, used for the shortest possible time, only when it is in the best interest of the child and limited to exceptional cases (A/HRC/28/68). Accordingly, the lack of gender-centred juvenile justice policies directly contributes to the perpetration of torture and ill-treatment of girls. There is an urgent need for policies that promote the use of such alternative measures as diversion and restorative justice, incorporate broad prevention programmes, build a protective environment and address the root causes of violence against girls. Failure to support girls in detention with adequate and complete information about their rights in a comprehensible manner and to provide assistance with reporting complaints in a safe, supportive and confidential manner further aggravates mistreatment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Gender
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Girls
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 88
- Paragraph text
- International standards provide for prompt and regular access to medical care for persons deprived of liberty. States are obligated to guarantee the availability of prompt, independent, impartial, adequate and consensual medical examinations at the time of arrest and at regular intervals thereafter. Medical examinations must also be provided as soon as a detainee enters a custodial or interview facility and upon each transfer. Prompt, independent, impartial and professional examinations in accordance with the Manual on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment must be carried out pursuant to allegations of mistreatment or any sign that mistreatment may have occurred (see A/68/295 and E/CN.4/2004/56). The well-established prohibition against medical personnel engaging, actively or passively, in acts that may constitute participation in, complicity or acquiescence in, incitement to or attempts to commit torture or ill-treatment (see CAT/C/51/4) merits recalling.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 99
- Paragraph text
- Coerced confessions are regrettably admitted into evidence in many jurisdictions, in particular where law enforcement relies on confessions as the principal means of solving cases and courts fail to put an end to these practices. The protocol must address the need to change the culture of tolerance and impunity for coerced confessions in such cases. National legislation must accept confessions only when made in the presence of competent and independent counsel (and support persons when appropriate) and confirmed before an independent judge (see A/HRC/13/39/Add.5 and A/HRC/4/33/Add.3). Courts should never admit extrajudicial confessions that are uncorroborated by other evidence or that have been recanted (see A/HRC/25/60). If doubts arise about the voluntariness of a person's statements, as when no information about the circumstances of the statement is available or when pursuant to arbitrary, secret or incommunicado detention, the statement should be excluded regardless of direct evidence or knowledge of abuse (see A/63/223).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 2
- Paragraph text
- In examining the relationship between the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and the international legal principles governing the use of force by State agents, and in developing concrete recommendations on the matter, the Special Rapporteur hopes to strengthen the capacity of States to ensure the effective prevention of and accountability for torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, including in extra-custodial settings. Moreover, as a complement to existing international standards governing the use of force, the present report is aimed at contributing to the development of seamless guidance on the entire spectrum of the use of force, from non-lethal to deliberately lethal and from custodial to extra -custodial, and therefore at supporting States in complying with their relevant huma n rights obligations. The report is also aimed at facilitating synergies, both at the national and the international levels, between mechanisms tasked with protection against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and those involved in overseeing and regulating the use of force more generally.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 31
- Paragraph text
- Building and further elaborating on these observations, the Special Rapporteur concludes that it is the deliberate instrumentalization of the pain or suffering inflicted on a powerless person as a vehicle for achieving a particular purpose, even if exclusively for the sadistic gratification of the perpetrator, which is the essence of torture. For the purposes of the present report, “powerlessness” means that someone is overpowered, in other words, has come under the direct physical or equivalent control of the perpetrator and has lost the capacity to resist or escape the infliction of pain or suffering. Even though the text of article 1 of the Convention against Torture suggests that the range of purposes capable of qualifying an act as torture is limited, the specifically listed purposes — interrogation, punishment, intimidation, coercion or discrimination of any kind — are phrased so broadly that it is difficult to envisage a realistic scenario of purposeful ill-treatment against a powerless person that would escape the definition of torture. As a matter of generic concept, therefore, the definition of torture does not necessarily depend on the precise purpose or intensity of the inflicted pain or suffering, but on the intentionality and purposefulness of that infliction in conjunction with the powerlessness of the victim.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 54
- Paragraph text
- In principle, the current trend towards replacing firearms with “less lethal” incapacitating weapons is positive in that it promotes a differentiated use of force and aims to minimize harm. At the same time, the widespread availability of incapacitating weapons also tends to lower the threshold for the use of force and entails a significant risk of “overuse” in situations in which the desired purpose could reasonably have been achieved through less coercive, less dangerous and less harmful means. Moreover, although “less lethal” weapons are designed to incapacitate while avoiding lethal outcomes, they are also specifically designed to inflict pain or suffering as a means of repelling or otherwise coercing the targeted persons. For example, several bodies and specialized organizations have specifically highlighted the risk of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment associated with the extra-custodial use of electrical discharge weapons delivering electric shocks through projectiles (for example, tasers), or upon direct physical contact (for example, batons, shields or helmets).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 30
- Paragraph text
- As a previous mandate holder has clarified, “torture constitutes such a horrible assault on the dignity of a human being because the torturer deliberately inflicts severe pain or suffering on a powerless victim for a specific purpose, such as extracting a confession or information from the victim” (A/HRC/13/39, para. 60; see also A/63/175, para. 50). The distinguishing factor between torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment “is not the intensity of the suffering inflicted, but rather the purpose of the conduct, the intention of the perpetrator and the powerlessness of the victim” (A/HRC/13/39, para. 60). Indeed, “all purposes listed in Article 1 CAT, as well as the TP [travaux préparatoires] of the Declaration and the Convention, refer to a situation where the victim of torture is a detainee or a person ‘at least under the factual power or control of the person inflicting the pain or suffering’, and where the perpetrator uses this unequal and powerful situation to achieve a certain effect, such as the extraction of information, intimidation, or punishment”.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 14
- Paragraph text
- In practice, the required standard of precaution does not impose an unrealistic burden but always relates to what is reasonably possible in the circumstances.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 3
- Paragraph text
- While the present report is focused on the extra-custodial use of force by State agents, its conclusions generally will also be relevant, mutatis mutandis, for non-physical forms of coercion and for ill-treatment committed by non-State actors. Owing to constraints of time and space, the Special Rapporteur intends to more systematically consider those issues in subsequent thematic reports. Moreover, in the present report the extra-custodial use of force under the law enforcement paradigm both in peacetime and in armed conflict is covered, but the use of force as a means of warfare under the hostilities paradigm is not examined. The terms “State agent” and “law enforcement official” will be used interchangeably to denote any person exercising, de jure or de facto, public authority on behalf of the State, whether of military or civilian status and whether appointed, elected, employed or contracted, including private security personnel. Finally, the implications of the extra-custodial use of force are examined in the present report under human rights law only, and not under potentially applicable international humanitarian law.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 20
- Paragraph text
- Torture has been defined in many universal and regional instruments, albeit not always in precisely identical terms.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 51
- Paragraph text
- In the view of the Special Rapporteur, a weapon has to be considered as inherently cruel, inhuman or degrading if it is either specifically designed or of a nature (that is, of no other practical use than) to: (a) employ unnecessary, excessive or otherwise unlawful force against persons; or (b) inflict pain and suffering on powerless individuals. In extra-custodial settings governed by the law enforcement paradigm, examples of inherently cruel, inhuman or degrading weapons include: (a) spiked batons or shields, and any other type of weapon or ammunition specifically designed or of a nature to unnecessarily aggravate wounds and suffering; (b) stun belts and any other type of body-worn device capable of delivering electric shocks through remote control, given that they cause not only physical pain but also constant emotions of extreme anguish and humiliation, as well as the complete subjugation of the victim irrespective of physical distance; and (c) certain unnecessarily painful, injurious or humiliating devices designed to restrain persons in the process of arrest, such as thumb- and finger-cuffs and -screws.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 32
- Paragraph text
- Thus, while torture always requires the intentional and purposeful infliction of pain or suffering on a powerless person, other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment can also comprise the infliction of pain or suffering without deliberate intention (for example, as an expected or unexpected incidental effect) or without instrumentalizing such pain and suffering for a particular purpose, and can include the unnecessary, excessive or otherwise unlawful use of force against persons who are not powerless, for example, in situations of self-defence, arrest or crowd control. The transition from “other” cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment to torture is illustrated in Corumbiara v. Brazil, in which the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights first noted that “the police used excessive, unnecessary, and disproportionate force against the workers, thereby injuring over fifty of them” and then pointed out that “after bringing the situation entirely under control, the State agents submitted the workers to beatings, humiliation, and inhuman and degrading treatment”, concluding that, once Brazil had “gained full control of the situation”, its use of force against the workers amounted to torture.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 34
- Paragraph text
- Mandate holders have consistently maintained that, conceptually, the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is not confined to acts carried out against persons deprived of their liberty, but also covers excessive police violence, such as during arrest and the policing of assemblies, or even torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment by acquiescence, namely, when States violate their due diligence obligation to combat ill-treatment at the hands of non-State actors, including harmful traditional practices, such as female genital mutilation, domestic violence and trafficking in human beings (A/HRC/13/39, summary. See also A/HRC/28/68/Add.4, para. 27 (protests); A/HRC/31/57, paras. 51-53 (sexual violence); E/CN.4/2006/6, para. 38 (police powers); A/HRC/13/39, para. 61 (arrests); and E/CN.4/1997/7, paras. 122-123 (police brutality)). Similarly, in reference to extra-custodial settings, the Human Rights Council has expressed concern about the use of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment against persons exercising their freedoms of peaceful assembly, of expression and of association in all regions of the world (see Human Rights Council resolution 25/38).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Harmful Practices
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 26
- Paragraph text
- While the distinction between torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment will always depend on the applicable treaty definition, the generic observations set out in the paragraphs below can be made.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 12
- Paragraph text
- Even if the use of force is necessary and proportionate in the immediate circumstances of a case, it may nonetheless be unlawful if it results from a failure to plan, organize and control operations so as to minimize harm, respect and preserve human life and avoid any excessive use of force.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 2
- Paragraph text
- In examining the relationship between the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and the international legal principles governing the use of force by State agents, and in developing concrete recommendations on the matter, the Special Rapporteur hopes to strengthen the capacity of States to ensure the effective prevention of and accountability for torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, including in extra-custodial settings. Moreover, as a complement to existing international standards governing the use of force, the present report is aimed at contributing to the development of seamless guidance on the entire spectrum of the use of force, from non-lethal to deliberately lethal and from custodial to extra-custodial, and therefore at supporting States in complying with their relevant human rights obligations. The report is also aimed at facilitating synergies, both at the national and the international levels, between mechanisms tasked with protection against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and those involved in overseeing and regulating the use of force more generally.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 51
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur also wishes to salute the outstanding work accomplished by his predecessors since the establishment of the mandate in 1985. He intends to consolidate and build on their achievements throughout his tenure.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 35
- Paragraph text
- In this context, the Special Rapporteur intends to look with a renewed degree of scrutiny into the particular risks of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment faced by irregular migrants in today's world. He will do so keeping in mind the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants, adopted by the General Assembly on 19 September 2016, in which States committed to protect the human rights of all refugees and migrants.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Movement
- Person(s) affected
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 39
- Paragraph text
- Finally, the Special Rapporteur is also interested in researching how to better assist States in preventing and investigating acts of torture and other ill-treatment suffered by refugees, asylum seekers and other irregular migrants at the hands of non-State actors such as traffickers and smugglers.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Movement
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 50
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur acknowledges that the mandate is part of a wider system and looks forward to working in close cooperation with the Committee against Torture, the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture, the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Victims of Torture, other special procedure mandate holders, regional anti-torture mechanisms, States and civil society actors.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 45
- Paragraph text
- This focus area raises questions of the due diligence of States as well as, to a certain extent, of the direct obligations of non-State actors as far as the absolute prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is concerned. It should be recalled that, although non-State actors are not directly bound by human rights treaties, there are other treaty provisions prohibiting torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment that may be directly binding on them. Most notably, under international humanitarian law, both States and non-State actors are absolutely prohibited from resorting to torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment for reasons related to an armed conflict. Moreover, any person resorting to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment amounting to a war crime, a crime against humanity, or even genocide is subject to prosecution under international criminal law. Arguably, the universal prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment can also be based on a general principle of law, namely what the International Court of Justice referred to as "elementary considerations of humanity". According to article 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, such general principles of law constitute an independent source of international law along with treaties and custom.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment 2016, para. 72h
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to abuses in health-care settings, the Special Rapporteur calls upon States to:] Adopt transparent and accessible legal gender recognition procedures and abolish requirements for sterilization and other harmful procedures as preconditions;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Gender
- Harmful Practices
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 85n
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to the vulnerability of children deprived of their liberty and policy reform, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To prohibit the use of immigration detention as a method of control or deterrence for migrant children;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Movement
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment 2016, para. 73c
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to domestic and private-actor violence against women, girls, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons, the Special Rapporteur calls upon States to:] Provide community support programmes and services, including shelters, to victims and their dependents;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Gender
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Girls
- LGBTQI+
- Women
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 32
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur is interested in conducting a global survey on how States implement such safeguards. He will actively cooperate with Governments during his tenure to identify challenges and best practices and to encourage States to live up to their obligations to fully implement relevant safeguards in order to make detainees' rights a reality rather than an aspiration.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 86k
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to conditions during detention, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To ensure appropriate resources and staffing for all places of deprivation of liberty.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 86d
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to conditions during detention, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To prohibit solitary confinement of any duration and for any purpose;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment 2016, para. 72a
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to abuses in health-care settings, the Special Rapporteur calls upon States to:] Take concrete measures to establish legal and policy frameworks that effectively enable women and girls to assert their right to access reproductive health services;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- Girls
- Women
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment 2016, para. 74a
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to harmful practices, the Special Rapporteur calls upon States to:] Remove the defence of "honour" and other mitigating factors in prosecuting victims' relatives; and engage in community outreach and public education campaigns to raise public awareness about honour-based crimes;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Harmful Practices
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Families
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 24
- Paragraph text
- The Istanbul Protocol is a uniquely and fundamentally important tool for the prevention of torture and other ill-treatment around the world. Discussions have started in recent years about how to strengthen and enhance the Protocol to better support torture victims' pursuit of justice.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 29
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur intends to take the work of his predecessor a step further and commits to contribute actively, in consultation and cooperation with other stakeholders, to the development of universal guidelines on investigative interviewing.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 85h
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to the vulnerability of children deprived of their liberty and policy reform, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To prohibit laws, policies and practices that allow children to be subjected to adult sentences and punishments, and to prohibit the death penalty and life imprisonment in all its forms;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 34
- Paragraph text
- This rise in the number of forced displacements is paralleled by a growing and worrying tendency around the world to criminalize irregular migration, to deter applications for asylum and to detain people on the move. In this context, refugees, asylum seekers and other irregular migrants have become more vulnerable to human rights violations, including torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Movement
- Person(s) affected
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 35
- Paragraph text
- The protocol must provide detailed guidance on the purpose and parameters of a human rights-compliant interviewing model that promotes a human rights-based approach, enhances the professionalism and effectiveness of law enforcement and other State agents and is premised on the aim of ensuring that all interviews are conducted without resort to torture, ill-treatment or coercion.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment 2016, para. 74d
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to harmful practices, the Special Rapporteur calls upon States to:] Ensure that victims of honour-based violence have equal access to justice and remedies, including appropriate long-term social, psychological, medical and other appropriate specialized rehabilitation measures.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Harmful Practices
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 33
- Paragraph text
- Conflicts, violence, persecution, poverty and food insecurity are driving unprecedented waves of people to cross international borders in a desperate search for safety. According to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, in 2015 alone, 65.3 million individuals were forcibly displaced worldwide, the largest number since the Second World War.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Food & Nutrition
- Humanitarian
- Movement
- Poverty
- Person(s) affected
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 17
- Paragraph text
- In carrying out his mandate, the Special Rapporteur will always endeavour to engage in an open, respectful and constructive dialogue with States and other international, regional and non-governmental stakeholders and aim to gain a consolidated understanding of all relevant perspectives, concerns and challenges before drawing any conclusions or trying to identify the most suitable manner of action.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment 2016, para. 70v
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to women, girls, and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons in detention, the Special Rapporteur calls on all States to:] Ensure the physical and mental integrity of detainees at all times and prevent, investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of violence, harassment and abuse by staff members or other prisoners, at all times;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Gender
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Girls
- LGBTQI+
- Women
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment 2016, para. 73a
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to domestic and private-actor violence against women, girls, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons, the Special Rapporteur calls upon States to:] Repeal or reform civil laws that restrict women's access to divorce, property and inheritance rights and that subjugate women and limit their ability to escape situations of domestic and other gender-based violence;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Gender
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Girls
- LGBTQI+
- Women
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 85k
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to the vulnerability of children deprived of their liberty and policy reform, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] Not to detain children in law enforcement establishments for more than 24 hours, and only in child-friendly environments;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 85t
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to the vulnerability of children deprived of their liberty and policy reform, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To collect quantitative and qualitative data on of children deprived of their liberty, and to elaborate and publish the State's plans for children deprived of liberty;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment 2016, para. 72b
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to abuses in health-care settings, the Special Rapporteur calls upon States to:] Decriminalize abortion and ensure access to legal and safe abortions, at a minimum in cases of rape, incest and severe or fatal fetal impairment and where the life or physical or mental health of the mother is at risk;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- Infants
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 56
- Paragraph text
- The questioning of persons is a specialist task that requires specific training in order to be performed successfully and in accordance with the highest standards of professionalism. The protocol must insist on the importance of adequate and regular training for law enforcement and other personnel involved in the questioning of persons (see A/HRC/4/33/Add.3 and CAT/C/USA/CO/2).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 21
- Paragraph text
- In all his endeavours, the Special Rapporteur will promote adherence to, and ratification of, core relevant human rights treaties. At the same time, the Special Rapporteur will also promote so-called soft-law standards such as, but not limited to, the Nelson Mandela Rules, the Body of Principles for the Protection of all Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment, the Bangkok Rules, the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (Beijing Rules), the United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty, the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials and other relevant instruments. Ultimately, the Special Rapporteur will prioritize results-based pragmatism rather than formalism without, however, compromising on applicable norms, terms and standards. Therefore, the primary focus of the Special Rapporteur will not necessarily be to achieve universal ratification of relevant treaties, but rather to advocate for the implementation, in actual practice, of norms, procedures and mechanisms for the effective prevention of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Adolescents
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 85s
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to the vulnerability of children deprived of their liberty and policy reform, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To transfer the oversight of all places of deprivation of liberty of children from justice, law enforcement or border management authorities to those responsible for child protection;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 85g
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to the vulnerability of children deprived of their liberty and policy reform, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To set the minimum age of criminal responsibility to no lower than 12 years, and to consider progressively raising it;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 85o
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to the vulnerability of children deprived of their liberty and policy reform, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To ensure that unaccompanied migrant children are immediately provided with guardianship arrangements;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Movement
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 29
- Paragraph text
- Many safeguards against coercive and abusive questioning techniques can be implemented with limited financial expenditure, in a cost-effective and sustainable manner. Where necessary, however, the protocol may identify additional approaches whereby States with limited material resources can guarantee effective and meaningful implementation and ensure adequate protection against abuses.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 85u
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to the vulnerability of children deprived of their liberty and policy reform, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To support the global study on children deprived of their liberty, prepared pursuant to General Assembly resolution 69/157, and the appointment of an independent expert to lead the study.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 85f
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to the vulnerability of children deprived of their liberty and policy reform, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To ensure that children in conflict with the law are charged, tried and sentenced within a State's juvenile justice system, never within the adult criminal justice system;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 85l
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to the vulnerability of children deprived of their liberty and policy reform, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To amend legislation to require a presumption of community living, with support, as the favoured policy, for children with disabilities;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Persons with disabilities
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 85p
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to the vulnerability of children deprived of their liberty and policy reform, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To take into consideration any trauma or exposure to torture or other forms of ill-treatment that child migrants have experienced prior to being detained;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Humanitarian
- Movement
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 86i
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to conditions during detention, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To provide educational, vocational and recreational age-appropriate opportunities and green spaces for children;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Education
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 86g
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to conditions during detention, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To respond to the specific needs of groups of children that are even more vulnerable to ill-treatment or torture, such as girls, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex children, and children with disabilities;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Gender
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Girls
- LGBTQI+
- Persons with disabilities
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 20
- Paragraph text
- While the legal framework around torture is uniquely developed, the Special Rapporteur is of the view that certain terms relating to the prohibition of torture that are relied upon require reaffirmation and clarification. For example, while the Convention expressly defines torture in its article 1 (1), no such definition exists of "other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" as a whole, or of its separate elements. A former Special Rapporteur has argued that "the distinguishing factor is not the intensity of the suffering inflicted, but rather the purpose of the conduct, the intention of the perpetrator and the powerlessness of the victim" (see A/HRC/13/39, para. 60). Thus, based on the work undertaken by his predecessors, the Special Rapporteur will aim to further illuminate and interpret the exact parameters and obligations surrounding the absolute prohibition of torture. With a view to contributing to the doctrine on the prohibition of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the Special Rapporteur will also endeavour to further clarify the criteria and thresholds rendering a particular treatment or punishment "cruel", "inhuman" or "degrading". In doing so, the Special Rapporteur will aim to ensure that the protection space offered to victims of torture and other ill-treatment remains adequate in the light of the fast-evolving challenges marking the contemporary international environment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 28
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur proposed that the first step in the development of universal guidelines on investigative interviewing would be to hold a broad public consultation. In parallel, OHCHR was tasked by the Human Rights Council, in its resolution 31/31, to organize an intersessional seminar to exchange national experiences and best practices on the implementation of effective safeguards to prevent torture and other ill-treatment during police custody.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 86h
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to conditions during detention, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To facilitate contact to the outside world, in particular with families and legal representatives;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Families
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 86a
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to conditions during detention, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To separate children and adults in all places of detention and, when in the best interests of the child, to hold children and adults together during daytime, and only under strict supervision;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 7
- Paragraph text
- Nevertheless, the sophisticated normative frameworks in place often do not translate into a reduction in practices of torture, ill-treatment or coercion during questioning, which are frequently used by State agents worldwide during law enforcement investigations of common and serious criminal offences, during military and intelligence operations and during armed conflict.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 13
- Paragraph text
- Mistreatment is also regularly employed as a means of punishment or reprisals, often owing to the institutional culture of States' law enforcement agencies. In such cases, torture is part of a cultivated culture of fear and used as an instrument of power to exert social control over particular groups or segments of the population.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Social & Cultural Rights
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment 2016, para. 72g
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to abuses in health-care settings, the Special Rapporteur calls upon States to:] Undertake appropriate training sessions and community-level gender-sensitization campaigns to combat discriminatory gender stereotypes underlying discrimination and abuses in the provision of health-care services to women, girls, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Gender
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- Girls
- LGBTQI+
- Women
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 60
- Paragraph text
- A number of due process guarantees and procedural safeguards guaranteeing the right to justice and fair trial, and against arbitrary detention, are critical and inextricably linked to the prevention of torture and ill-treatment during questioning. Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides guarantees against the use of all forms of direct or indirect physical or psychological pressure by authorities against a suspect for the purposes of obtaining a confession. The rights not to be compelled to testify against oneself or to confess guilt and to be guaranteed counsel and legal aid are particularly crucial. Aside from safeguarding the fundamental human rights of individuals, these measures benefit societies generally, by fostering trust in institutions, promoting the reliability of evidence and facilitating the effectiveness of national judicial processes (see A/HRC/WGAD/2012/40). Similarly, safeguards enshrined in article 9 of the Covenant help to prevent torture by reducing opportunities and incentives for mistreatment and coercion during detention.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 85i
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to the vulnerability of children deprived of their liberty and policy reform, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To provide additional training to the judiciary so that bail, probation and alternative measures to detention are considered;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment 2016, para. 72j
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to abuses in health-care settings, the Special Rapporteur calls upon States to:] Prohibit and prevent the discriminatory denial of medical care and of pain relief, including HIV treatment, to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- LGBTQI+
- Year
- 2016
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 82d
- Paragraph text
- [Regarding the use of information tainted by torture in any proceedings, all States should:] Ensure that the exercise of discretion by national authorities in circumstances where torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is alleged is prohibited;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 73b
- Paragraph text
- [Recommendations regarding judicial recognition and evaluation of forensic evidence in cases involving torture:] Ensure that all evidence in court proceedings is evaluated on merits, with a specific focus on the independence and impartiality of the body collecting the evidence;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 79
- Paragraph text
- States cannot resort to diplomatic assurances as a safeguard against torture or other ill-treatment, where there is a real risk of such acts. Such assurances are incapable of mitigating the responsibility of the State that relies on information so obtained.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 83j
- Paragraph text
- [Regarding the use by executive actors of information tainted by torture, all States should:] Stress that national guidelines must strictly adhere to the absolute prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and the resulting ban on any use of information obtained by torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment from an extraterritorial perspective 2015, para. 43
- Paragraph text
- States' non-refoulement obligations also embrace fundamental procedural obligations and rights that cannot be bypassed. First and foremost is the obligation to offer individuals a fair opportunity to make claims for refugee or asylum status, including the right not be returned to places where they risk being subjected to torture or other ill-treatment. In addition, there is the right to challenge detention and potential transfer (Committee against Torture, Arana v. France) on the basis of fear of mistreatment in the receiving State, which may be understood as a substantive guarantee of non-refoulement, part of the right to an effective remedy and inherent in the right to due process of law (Inter-American Court of Human Rights, United States Interdiction of Haitians on the High Seas). This challenge must take place prior to transfer (Human Rights Committee, Alzery v. Sweden), before an independent decision maker with the power to suspend the transfer during the pendency of the review and must be an individualized procedure incorporating timely notification of potential transfer and the right to appear before this independent body in person (Agiza v. Sweden). This inquiry is separate and independent from the determination of refugee status or grant or refusal of asylum.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Movement
- Person(s) affected
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 85b
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to the vulnerability of children deprived of their liberty and policy reform, the Special Rapporteur calls upon all States:] To ensure that child-appropriate age determination procedures are in place, and that the person is presumed to be under 18 years of age unless and until proven otherwise;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 18
- Paragraph text
- Of particular concern are attempts to undermine the prohibition of torture or other ill-treatment by using tainted statements outside of "proceedings", narrowly defined, for other purposes, such as intelligence gathering or covert operations. Cooperation in sharing intelligence between States has expanded significantly in the fight against terrorism and some police, security and intelligence agencies (collectively, executive agencies) have shown a willingness to receive and rely on information likely to be obtained through torture and other ill-treatment and to share that information with one another. The global trend of giving executive agencies increased powers of arrest, detention and interrogation have retracted the traditional safeguards against torture or other ill-treatment and led to further abuse of individuals. The practice by executive agencies of using information obtained by torture or other ill-treatment outside court proceedings must be examined to ensure that the prohibition against torture is upheld, a practice made even more dangerous because of the secrecy and lack of transparency that surrounds it. Regrettably, some States have diluted the cardinal principles necessary for preventing and suppressing torture and other ill-treatment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 73
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur is of the opinion that the aim of preventing and discouraging torture and other ill-treatment by rendering their products useless in legal proceedings is one strong policy objective of the exclusionary rule. If executive agencies are free to use information obtained by torture or other ill-treatment for other purposes, that constitutes an incentive to torture or ill-treatment in clear contradiction to the object and purpose of the absolute prohibition of such acts, including during interrogation. There is a clear affirmative obligation to prevent torture and ill-treatment that includes actions the State takes in its own jurisdiction to prevent torture or other ill-treatment in another jurisdiction. Thus, an interpretation focused on the objective of the norm demands that the collection, sharing and receiving of tainted information be banned, because otherwise the purpose of preventing and discouraging torture and other ill-treatment is negated. It is not sufficient to ensure that the judicial process is free from the taint of torture; torture must not be acquiesced in, encouraged or condoned in any manifestations of public power, whether executive or judicial.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 33
- Paragraph text
- Children experience pain and suffering differently to adults owing to their physical and emotional development and their specific needs. In children, ll-treatment may cause even greater or irreversible damage than for adults. Moreover, healthy development can be derailed by excessive or prolonged activation of stress response systems in the body, with damaging long-term effects on learning, behaviour and health. A number of studies have shown that, regardless of the conditions in which children are held, detention has a profound and negative impact on child health and development. Even very short periods of detention can undermine the child's psychological and physical well-being and compromise cognitive development. Children held in detention are at risk of post-traumatic stress disorder, and may exhibit such symptoms as insomnia, nightmares and bed-wetting. Feelings of hopelessness and frustration can be manifested in acts of violence against themselves or others. Reports on the effect of detention on children have found higher rates of suicide, suicide attempts and self-harm, mental disorder and developmental problems, including severe attachment disorder. The threshold at which treatment or punishment may be classified as torture or ill-treatment is therefore lower in the case of children, and in particular in the case of children deprived of their liberty.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 59
- Paragraph text
- States frequently detain children who are refugees, asylum seekers or irregular migrants for a number of reasons, such as health and security screening, to verify their identity or to facilitate their removal from the territory. Sometimes, children may be inadvertently detained because there is a failure to distinguish between child and adult migrants, such as when children are unable to prove their age. The Special Rapporteur has previously noted with concern that unaccompanied child migrants are systematically held in detention at police stations, border guard stations or migration detention centres instead of being held in reception centres, which are in practice often not numerous enough or are overcrowded (see A/HRC/16/52/Add.4, paras. 68-69). Most of the unaccompanied minors are not adequately informed about asylum procedures or their rights, do not have access to legal counsel or guardians, and are generally ignorant of the system. Furthermore, the procedure to identify minors and to assess their age and vulnerability appears to be completely inadequate, as many children reported being registered as adults (see A/HRC/16/52/Add.4, paras. 68-73 and CAT/C/USA/CO/3-5, para. 19).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Movement
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 49
- Paragraph text
- Children deprived of their liberty are often not allowed to maintain regular contact with their families and friends, because either they are denied contact as a form of punishment or are placed in facilities located far away from their homes and families. A lack of vocational, educational and recreational activities for children deprived of their liberty creates situations of risk of abuse and ill-treatment. When children spend most of their time confined in their cells, they may experience a lack of motivation and even depression, which in turn can leads to incidents of abuse and violence between children or with staff members. The Special Rapporteur wishes to point out that, while lack of activities is detrimental for any prisoner, it is especially harmful for children, who have a particular need for physical activity and intellectual stimulation. This is also true for children detained with their mothers in prison. During country visits, the Special Rapporteur has observed that women's section of prisons often show inadequate space for women with children and a lack of well-equipped recreation areas for children (see A/HRC/22/53/Add.2, para. 58).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Women
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 74b
- Paragraph text
- [Recommendations regarding promoting medical documentation and the application of the Istanbul Protocol as a standard:] Establish an "investigative authority" with guarantees of independence, efficiency and effectiveness and with powers to investigate sua sponte allegations of torture in accordance with the Istanbul Protocol;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 82e
- Paragraph text
- [Regarding the use of information tainted by torture in any proceedings, all States should:] Ensure that the use of real or other evidence obtained as an indirect result of acts of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is prohibited and excluded from any proceedings;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment from an extraterritorial perspective 2015, para. 29
- Paragraph text
- The Convention's drafting history reveals a preoccupation with balancing the practicability of implementing its provisions rather than an intent to limit the ability to hold States responsible for extraterritorial acts of torture or ill-treatment or to dilute the strength of its applicability. From the original phrasing of the 1978 draft by Sweden, four provisions - articles 11, (5) (1) (a), 5 (2) and 7 (1) - were in fact broadened during drafting from initial reference to "territory" to "any territory under its jurisdiction", with the initial reference to territory alone being rejected as too restrictive. In article 2 (1), the addition of "territory" to the initial reference to "jurisdiction" was intended to avoid the Convention's applicability being triggered by the nationality principle alone. There is also support for the argument that the same formulation was adopted in articles 12, 13 and 16 to ensure textual consistency. That the drafting history reveals changes from references to both "jurisdiction" and "territory" alone to "any territory under its jurisdiction" can be understood to reflect practical concerns rather than a wish to limit the Convention's extraterritorial applicability. A literal reading of the Convention's jurisdictional clauses clearly contradicts its object and purpose and gives rise to impermissible loopholes in its protections.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 74a
- Paragraph text
- [Recommendations regarding promoting medical documentation and the application of the Istanbul Protocol as a standard:] Endorse and support the Istanbul Protocol Plan of Action for the effective implementation of the Istanbul Protocol;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 24
- Paragraph text
- In some States, due to a lack of capacity and expertise in investigating crimes, extracting confessions through ill-treatment or torture is still seen as the most efficient or only way to secure evidence and conviction. In this regard, the Special Rapporteur draws attention to the international standards intended to provide assistance to national law enforcement, including the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials and the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under any Form of Detention or Imprisonment. To ensure compliance with international standards, all applicable procedures should be reviewed regularly. During his country visits, the Special Rapporteur has observed that some States are unable to provide information on cases where evidence has been excluded because it was either found to have been obtained under torture, or the national provisions did not accurately reflect the exclusionary rule by, for example, not defining the measures to be taken by courts if evidence appears to have been obtained through torture or other ill-treatment, or by not putting the mechanisms in place by which evidence may be declared inadmissible. The legislation of some countries does meet the standards set by the exclusionary rule, but that is not true of all countries.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 83b
- Paragraph text
- [Regarding the use by executive actors of information tainted by torture, all States should:] Ensure that if States request foreign intelligence services to undertake activities on their behalf, all legal standards regarding the absolute prohibition of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment shall apply;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 76
- Paragraph text
- Children should be appropriately separated in detention, including but not limited to children in need of care and those in conflict with the law, children awaiting trial and convicted children, boys and girls, younger children and older children, and children with physical and mental disabilities and those without. Children detained under criminal legislation should never be detained together with adult detainees. The Special Rapporteur also notes that the permitted exception to the separation of children from adults provided for in article 37 (c) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child should be interpreted sensu stricto. The best interests of the child should not be defined in accordance to the convenience of the State. Children in conflict with the law should be held in detention centres specifically designed for persons under the age of 18 years, offering a non-prison-like environment and regimes tailored to their needs and run by specialized staff, trained in dealing with children. Such facilities should offer ready access to natural light and adequate ventilation, access to sanitary facilities that are hygienic and respect privacy and, in principle, accommodation in individual bedrooms. Large dormitories should be avoided.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Boys
- Children
- Girls
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 51
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur has previously recognized that ill-treatment may occur in a diverse range of settings, even where the purpose or intention of the State's action or inaction was not to degrade, humiliate or punish the child. He notes that most instances of ill-treatment of children deprived of their liberty outside of the criminal justice system, such as children in administrative immigration detention or institutional settings, involve acts of omission rather than commission, such as emotional disengagement or unsanitary or unsafe conditions, and result from poor policies rather than from an intention to inflict suffering. Purely negligent conduct lacks the intent required under the prohibition of torture, but may constitute ill-treatment if it leads to pain and suffering of some severity (A/63/175, para. 49). This is the case when the suffering is severe and meets the minimum threshold under the prohibition against torture and other ill-treatment, when the State is, or should be, aware of the suffering, including when no appropriate treatment was offered, and when the State has failed to take all reasonable steps to protect the child's physical and mental integrity.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 82a
- Paragraph text
- [Regarding the use of information tainted by torture in any proceedings, all States should:] Reaffirm the absolute and non-derogable nature of the exclusionary rule;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment from an extraterritorial perspective 2015, para. 69
- Paragraph text
- The absolute prohibition of non-refoulement applies at all times, even when States are operating or holding individuals extraterritorially, including border control operations on the high seas. The procurement of diplomatic assurances, which are inherently unreliable and ineffective, cannot be used by States to escape the absolute obligation to refrain from refoulement. The Special Rapporteur calls upon States to assess non-refoulement under the Convention against Torture independently of refugee or asylee status determinations, so as to ensure that the fundamental right to be free from torture or other ill-treatment is respected even in cases where non-refoulement under refugee law may be circumscribed. States are required to afford individuals fundamental procedural obligations in connection with their non refoulement obligations, including, but not limited to a fair opportunity to state claims for refugee or asylee status and the right to challenge detention and potential transfer on the basis of mistreatment in a receiving State (a) prior to transfer; (b) before an independent decision maker with the power to suspend the transfer; and (c) through an individualized procedure incorporating timely notification of potential transfer and the right to appear before this independent body in person.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Movement
- Person(s) affected
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 73a
- Paragraph text
- [Recommendations regarding judicial recognition and evaluation of forensic evidence in cases involving torture:] Ensure that prosecutors utilize and process medical evidence in accordance with national standards and procedures, and that prosecutors and judges order independent forensic evaluation where appropriate;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 74c
- Paragraph text
- [Recommendations regarding promoting medical documentation and the application of the Istanbul Protocol as a standard:] Ensure that powers of the "investigative authority" are enshrined in legislation;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 74e
- Paragraph text
- [Recommendations regarding promoting medical documentation and the application of the Istanbul Protocol as a standard:] For signatories of the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture, the National Preventive Mechanism has to include forensic expertise under the conditions mentioned in this report.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 74d
- Paragraph text
- [Recommendations regarding promoting medical documentation and the application of the Istanbul Protocol as a standard:] Allocate sufficient budgetary and technical resources to the "investigative authority";
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 69i
- Paragraph text
- [Recommendations regarding safeguard for effective medical evaluations of alleged torture and other ill-treatment in detention:] Ensure that detainees have the right to review and have a copy of their own medical records and the right to have them transferred promptly with the detainee if she or he is moved to another facility.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 57
- Paragraph text
- The invocation of "assurances" as a means of eliminating the possible risk of torture or other ill-treatment is of great concern. In the context of the non-refoulement provision, the Special Rapporteur, the Committee against Torture and the Human Rights Committee have found that assurances from other States do not relieve the sending State from its responsibility to prevent torture. Similarly, assurances by providers of information that torture or other ill-treatment was not involved in producing it are not sufficient to permit cooperation where a real risk is identified. Promises of humane treatment given by Governments that practice torture or ill-treatment are not reliable and do not provide an effective safeguard against the real risk of acts of torture or other ill-treatment. States that engage in torture or ill-treatment routinely deny and conceal its use and it is therefore difficult, if not impossible, for executive agencies to verify whether their assurances are truthful. In addition, assurances are not legally binding or enforceable and the States concerned are unlikely to follow up on the assurances provided, since verifying and acknowledging that the abuse has occurred means an admission by both countries that they are responsible for violations of the prohibition of torture.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 72
- Paragraph text
- The deprivation of liberty of children is intended to be an ultima ratio measure, to be used only for the shortest possible period of time, only if is in the best interests of the child, and limited to exceptional cases. Failure to recognize or apply these safeguards increases the risk of children being subjected to torture or other ill-treatment, and implicates State responsibility. Therefore, States should, to the greatest extent possible, and always using the least restrictive means necessary, adopt alternatives to detention that fulfil the best interests of the child and the obligation to prevent torture or other ill-treatment of children, together with their rights to liberty and family life, through legislation, policies and practices that allow children to remain with family members or guardians in a non-custodial, community-based context. Alternatives to detention must be given priority in order to prevent torture and the ill-treatment of children. This includes access to counselling, probation and community services, including mediation services and restorative justice. Furthermore, if circumstances change and the reclusion of children is no longer required, States are required to release them, even when they have not completed their sentences.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 83d
- Paragraph text
- [Regarding the use by executive actors of information tainted by torture, all States should:] Restrain from creating a market for the fruits of illegal and abhorrent interrogation practices by collecting, sharing or receiving information obtained by torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 17
- Paragraph text
- The exclusionary rule is fundamental for upholding the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (other ill-treatment) by providing a disincentive to carry out such acts. It contains an absolute prohibition on the use of statements made as a result of torture or other ill-treatment in any proceedings. However, in practice, this prohibition is not always upheld. Moreover, the wording of article 15 of the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment may be its weakest aspect and the one most frequently flouted by States that practice torture. Some States interpret "any proceedings" narrowly, to mean judicial proceedings of a criminal nature against the person who has made the statement. More importantly, some insist that the exclusionary rule is triggered only when it is established that the statement was made under torture. However, the exclusionary rule is a norm of customary international law and is not limited to the Convention, which is only one aspect of it. The exclusionary rule must be considered as one element under the overarching absolute prohibition against acts of torture and other ill-treatment and the obligation to prevent such acts.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 83c
- Paragraph text
- [Regarding the use by executive actors of information tainted by torture, all States should:] Reiterate that no exceptional circumstances may be invoked as a justification for torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 83g
- Paragraph text
- [Regarding the use by executive actors of information tainted by torture, all States should:] Presume that, in cases of information originating in countries where torture is a systematic or widespread practice, information collected or received is a product of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 25
- Paragraph text
- In jurisdictions where independent medical examinations must be authorized by investigators, prosecutors or penitentiary authorities, those authorities have ample opportunity to delay authorization, so that any injuries deriving from torture have healed by the time such an examination is conducted. Additionally, such medical and forensic reports are often of such poor quality that they provide little assistance to judges or prosecutors when deciding whether to exclude statements. Some judges are willing to admit confessions without attempting to corroborate the confession with other evidence, even if the person recants before the judge and claims to have been tortured. In addition, cases submitted to the courts are sometimes based solely on confessions by the accused and lack any material evidence, or else judges establish prerequisites, such as visible or recognizable marks, for ruling that evidence obtained under torture or other ill-treatment is invalid. The Committee against Torture has stated that physical marks or scars should not be a prerequisite for ruling that evidence obtained under torture is invalid (CAT/C/SR.1024, para. 29). In addition, in order to show that evidence has not been obtained by torture, a court must rely on evidence other than the testimony of the investigating officer.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 54
- Paragraph text
- Collecting, sharing or receiving information from a country that is known, or ought to be known, to use torture in a widespread or systematic way is turning a blind eye to what goes on and is tantamount to complicity in torture, as it tacitly acknowledges the illegal situation and fails to prevent and discourage the use of torture. Systematic or widespread violations include torture, both as a State policy and as a practice by public authorities, over which a Government has no effective control. Thus, if a State is known to torture detainees, or specific categories of detainees, systematically, no other State may actively collect, share or recognize any information it receives from an agency of that State as "lawfully obtained", nor may it "passively" accept such information. In addition, collecting, sharing or receiving information from a State that is known, or ought to be known, to use torture in a widespread or systematic way would also trigger State responsibility under draft article 41 on the responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts. Commentaries of the International Law Commission specify that the non-recognition obligation contained in draft article 41, paragraph 2, also prohibits acts which would imply such recognition.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment from an extraterritorial perspective 2015, para. 14
- Paragraph text
- The prohibition against torture and other ill-treatment is codified in most international and regional human rights instruments and is a rule of customary international law and a jus cogens, or peremptory, norm of international law applying to all States. The Special Rapporteur recalls that the obligation to respect the human rights of all persons applies whenever States affect the rights of individuals abroad through their acts or omissions. All States parties to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights must respect and ensure the rights contained therein to all persons within their power or effective control outside their territories and regardless of how such power or effective control was obtained. This includes "all individuals regardless of nationality or statelessness … who may [be] subject to the jurisdiction of the State Party". This is because construing State responsibility so as to allow a State to perpetrate on the territory of another State human rights abuses that it could not perpetrate on its own territory would produce unconscionable and absurd results at odds with fundamental legal obligations. The International Court of Justice recognizes that human rights obligations are unequivocally applicable in respect of acts done by States in the exercise of their jurisdiction outside their own territories.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 80
- Paragraph text
- Executive agencies should be governed by detailed guidelines, which reflect all the international standards required by the prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment, to ensure that they avoid complicity in such acts.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 82b
- Paragraph text
- [Regarding the use of information tainted by torture in any proceedings, all States should:] Review criminal investigation practices with a view to promoting professional standards and eliminating confessions as the primary or sole evidence necessary for a prosecution;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 83l
- Paragraph text
- [Regarding the use by executive actors of information tainted by torture, all States should:] Provide effective, impartial and independent oversight of the intelligence services.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 70
- Paragraph text
- Recommendation regarding cases of sexual assaults: Ensure that in cases of alleged sexual assault showing no or limited physical evidence, because of passage of time or other reasons, a comprehensive physical and mental health evaluation should still be performed with special attention to behavioural and psychological evidence (see FCO sexual violence protocol).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Health
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment from an extraterritorial perspective 2015, para. 47
- Paragraph text
- Article 5 (2) establishes the obligation to bring perpetrators to justice (to investigate, prosecute and punish) under the universal jurisdiction principle, requiring that each State party must take the measures necessary to establish its jurisdiction over relevant offences in cases where the alleged offender is present in "any territory under its jurisdiction" and it does not extradite him or her. The clause "any territory under its jurisdiction" clearly refers to the alleged offender's presence in any territory under the State's jurisdiction at the time of prospective apprehension, as opposed to denoting the locus of the act of torture. The latter would be an implausible, textually unfounded interpretation and would defeat the Convention's object and purpose. As explained by Danelius, discussions during the drafting process: Centred round the concept of so-called universal jurisdiction [and] whether each State should undertake … to assume jurisdiction not only based on territory or the offender's nationality but also over acts of torture committed outside its territory by persons not being its nationals. The principle of universal jurisdiction - which had already been accepted in conventions against hijacking of aircraft and other terrorist acts - was eventually accepted and found its place in article 5(2).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 26
- Paragraph text
- Although the exclusionary rule is not expressly listed among the rules that apply both to torture and to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, the Committee against Torture, as the authoritative interpreter of the Convention, has made it clear that statements and confessions obtained under all forms of ill-treatment must be excluded. That ambiguity has led some courts to decide that the exclusionary rule does not apply when the ill-treatment that has resulted in a confession does not reach the gravity required for torture. The Human Rights Committee has authoritatively interpreted article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and found that the exclusionary rule applies to both torture and other ill-treatment. Similarly, the Committee against Torture in its general comment No. 2 (para. 6), has held that "articles 3 to 15 of the Convention are likewise obligatory as applied to both torture and other ill-treatment" and article 12 of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment explicitly excludes statements made under cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 82i
- Paragraph text
- [Regarding the use of information tainted by torture in any proceedings, all States should:] Elaborate a rule that protects legitimate State secrets adequately and at the same time does not prevent a thorough examination of whether torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment has taken place.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 82h
- Paragraph text
- [Regarding the use of information tainted by torture in any proceedings, all States should:] Ensure that closed material procedures comply with the exclusionary rule and enable the individual effectively to challenge admissibility of evidence, including evidence from the security services;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 75
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur believe that there should be a formal obligation to notify a relative or another adult trusted by the child about his or her detention regardless of whether the child has so requested, except if this would not be in the best interests of the child. Parents or adults trusted by the child should furthermore be allowed to be present with the child during interrogation and any court appearances. An essential issue is the manner in which children are questioned. Interrogation should be age-sensitive and individualized, and undertaken by authorities that are skilled in interviewing children. Video recording should be given due consideration in certain circumstances, to avoid causing distress to children because of repeated questioning, and numerous visits to courts. Children should also have immediate access to a lawyer and a health professional. A specific information sheet setting out the above-mentioned safeguards should be given to all children taken into custody immediately upon their arrival at a law enforcement establishment, and this information should be verbally explained to children in terms that they understand.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- Children
- Families
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 73e
- Paragraph text
- [Recommendations regarding judicial recognition and evaluation of forensic evidence in cases involving torture:] Encourage independent health experts to review State examinations and to conduct their own independent assessments;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 73f
- Paragraph text
- [Recommendations regarding judicial recognition and evaluation of forensic evidence in cases involving torture:] Ensure that public forensic medical services do not have a monopoly on expert forensic evidence for judicial purposes;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 38
- Paragraph text
- Such policies not only weaken the absolute prohibition of torture or other ill-treatment, but also create a market for information tainted by torture. Inevitably, they raise the question of complicity in torture or other ill-treatment and require a reassessment of the overall responsibility of all States to prevent and discourage acts of torture and ill-treatment. All States refuse to subject the work of their intelligence and security agencies to scrutiny or international oversight. Similarly, domestic courts follow this lead and reject motions to submit these executive practices to judicial review, even when the issue is the absolute prohibition of torture. This leads to the erroneous conclusion that the collection, sharing and receiving by the executive agencies of information tainted by torture is not subject to international law. There are numerous examples of the use of torture or other ill-treatment when there was no intention of using any of the information gained from that ill-treatment in subsequent legal proceedings, in which it would a priori be subjected to scrutiny and exclusion, for instance in administrative or preventive measures or sanctions against individuals or organizations.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 73g
- Paragraph text
- [Recommendations regarding judicial recognition and evaluation of forensic evidence in cases involving torture:] Institute safeguards and mechanisms to enable health professionals to report allegations and evidence of torture and other ill-treatment in an environment free from any harassment, intimidation or retaliation and in a manner compliant with their duties of confidentiality.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment from an extraterritorial perspective 2015, para. 65
- Paragraph text
- The jus cogens non-derogable prohibition against torture and other ill-treatment cannot be territorially limited. Whenever States bring a person within their jurisdiction by exercising control or authority over an area, place, individual or transaction they are bound by their fundamental obligation not to engage in or contribute to such acts. States moreover have an obligation to protect persons from torture and other ill-treatment and to ensure a broad range of attendant human rights obligations whenever they are in a position to do so by virtue of their control or influence extraterritorially over an area, place, transaction or persons. The obligation to prevent prohibited acts includes action that States take in their own jurisdictions to prevent such acts in another jurisdiction. This includes obligations to ensure that private actors over whom they have control or influence do not engage in or contribute to torture or other ill-treatment. Violations can arise from States' direct perpetration, omissions or acts of complicity with extraterritorial components. States are obliged, to the extent possible, to fight wrongfulness and to ensure cooperation in efforts and proceedings designed to end, uncover, remedy or prosecute and punish torture and other ill-treatment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2015
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 88a
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur calls upon all States to:] Apply the set of procedural standards and safeguards mentioned in the present report, at a minimum, to all cases of deprivation of liberty, as a matter of law and policy;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 69h
- Paragraph text
- [Recommendations regarding safeguard for effective medical evaluations of alleged torture and other ill-treatment in detention:] Prohibit the transfer of medical reports to law enforcement officials except by order of and under the supervision of a judge and with the consent of the victim;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Certain forms of abuses in health-care settings that may cross a threshold of mistreatment that is tantamount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2013, para. 62
- Paragraph text
- It is necessary to highlight additional measures needed to prevent torture and ill-treatment against people with disabilities, by synthesizing standards and coordinating actions in line with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Persons with disabilities
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 82
- Paragraph text
- The revision of Rule 55 creates an excellent opportunity to integrate the well-established, two-fold system of independent monitoring of places of detention that allows for inspections to be carried out by governmental agencies and other competent authorities distinct from those directly in charge of the administration of the place of detention or imprisonment (see the Optional Protocol, arts. 5.6, 17 and 35, and the Body of Principles, principle 29). The revised Rule 55 should make clear that the aforementioned inspection powers, as understood in the two-fold system, require judicial control to be in place. In this respect, the Rules should provide for the power of independent oversight mechanisms to have unimpeded access (on a regular and an ad hoc basis), without prior notice, to all places of deprivation of liberty, including police lock-ups, vehicles, prisons, pretrial detention facilities, security service premises, administrative detention areas, psychiatric hospitals and special detention facilities. They should be entitled to inquire and access information and documentation, including registries, and have private, unsupervised and confidential interviews with detainees of their own choosing. Finally, the monitoring bodies should be able to make their findings public and follow up on the outcome (United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty, rule 74).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Certain forms of abuses in health-care settings that may cross a threshold of mistreatment that is tantamount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2013, para. 60
- Paragraph text
- There are several areas in which the Special Rapporteur would like to suggest steps beyond what has already been proposed by the mandate in its efforts to promote the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities as the new normative paradigm and call for measures to combat impunity.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Persons with disabilities
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 50
- Paragraph text
- In addition, criterion for considering an expert opinion as evidence is that the person providing the opinion is in fact an expert. If the author is accepted as an expert, the probative value of the opinion will depend on the degree of certainty that the court attaches to the opinion in comparison to the existence of supporting or conflicting expert opinions. The process of analysis and the conclusions must be clear and logical and the expert must possess certain qualifications ensuring the rendering of an informed and reasoned conclusion. As a legal principle, an expert report on torture, its relevance and reliability should be weighed and assessed in the same manner as any other evidence. Where the expertise of a witness is not in doubt, there must be clear grounds for rejecting the expert's testimony or report. However, an expert's opinion is only as relevant and reliable as the circumstances surrounding its development and the information upon which it is based. For instance, if the underlying medical and psychological documentation on which the expert's opinion is based do not appear credible, the expert's report may be given no weight. Therefore, objective supporting evidence (for example, X-rays) can be crucial in determining the reliability of the expert opinion. If an expert report is available it must be taken into account and, if rejected, reasons must be given.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Certain forms of abuses in health-care settings that may cross a threshold of mistreatment that is tantamount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2013, para. 4
- Paragraph text
- system inadequacies, lack of resources or services will not justify ill-treatment. Although resource constraints may justify only partial fulfilment of some aspects of the right to health, a State cannot justify its non-compliance with core obligations, such as the absolute prohibition of torture, under any circumstances.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 88c
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur calls upon all States to:] Keep abreast of recent developments in international norms and standards and adopt, at a bare minimum, legislation and practices that are compliant with the Rules;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Commissions of inquiry 2012, para. 73
- Paragraph text
- In its recommendations, a commission of inquiry should identify clearly the ways in which the report is intended to be utilized by other mechanisms, including, but not limited to, investigation and prosecution of torture and other forms of ill-treatment, the provision of remedy and reparations to victims, and the prevention of torture and other forms of ill-treatment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 28
- Paragraph text
- Although Rule 95 clarifies that the scope of Rule 4 (1) extends to all persons deprived of their liberty, it is nevertheless important to make it explicit that the Rules are effectively applicable to all persons under any form of detention or imprisonment, whether for criminal or civil reasons, whether the person is detained prior to trial, while on remand or after conviction, or whether the individual is subject to so-called special security measures, administrative or corrective measures, or immigration-related measures. The Special Rapporteur urges that it be made explicit that the Rules are applicable to all forms of deprivation of liberty, without exception and regardless of the legal status of the imprisoned person. Furthermore, the Rules shall be applied (Rule 6 (1)) to all arrangements for the custody and treatment of persons subjected to any form of arrest, detention or imprisonment, with no discrimination, on grounds of international law, for example on grounds of age, national, ethnic or social origin, cultural beliefs and practices, birth or other status, including health status, disability, gender or other identity and sexual orientation (see Human Rights Council resolution 17/19 and Human Rights Committee general comment No. 18, para. 7), as well as labelling on grounds of psychological profile or criminal past.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 44
- Paragraph text
- Forensic medicine requires a continuous effort to remain abreast of new developments through ongoing training, study and reflection to provide information about previously undocumented torture situations and their physical and psychological consequences, transmit knowledge of new means of diagnosis and their potential, generate reflection on experiences arising from interventions in the field, and divulge new standards and guidelines. In order to fulfil their obligation to investigate, prosecute and punish and ensure reparations for torture and other ill-treatment, there is a need for more forensic experts (including pathologists, physicians, psychiatrists, psychologists, anthropologists and archaeologists) trained to do Istanbul Protocol evaluations. Emphasis must be laid upon training of forensic professionals in the documentation of torture sequels. There are still few State and non-State forensic specialists in the world. The participation of other physicians in such training and on the examination of alleged torture victims could help tackle this problem. Teaching is thus a key factor. States must also ensure even distribution of clinicians throughout the country. Equally important is the training of judicial, prosecutorial and law enforcement professionals. Prevention and investigation of torture under the Istanbul Protocol must be part of their compulsory legal curriculum and offered as part of continuing professional development programmes.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Commissions of inquiry 2012, para. 70
- Paragraph text
- Commissions of inquiry should therefore be considered complementary to other mechanisms, including criminal investigations and prosecution of perpetrators, the provision of reparations to victims, and extensive reforms to institutions, including the vetting of public officials. When carried out simultaneously with prosecutions, commissions of inquiry play a very important role in establishing a more comprehensive and nuanced picture of policy decisions (whether adopted publicly or in secrecy) that have resulted in patterns of torture and other forms of ill-treatment. The first duty of a commission of inquiry is to explore and develop facts in a rigorous and comprehensive way so that the precise details of torture campaigns may be discovered, protected against tampering or destruction, and disclosed to the public. This process of truth-seeking requires strict adherence to the guidelines set forth in the Istanbul Protocol. The information gathered by a commission of inquiry can also orient the investigative and prosecutorial strategies without substituting them. Moreover, the findings of a commission of inquiry can inform policy decisions of the executive or legislative branches, which should not depend on the outcome of trials. In that manner, the findings and recommendations of commissions of inquiry can help to fill gaps in the protection of human rights in the future, without prejudice to the determination of individual guilt or innocence, which only courts can make.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2012
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Certain forms of abuses in health-care settings that may cross a threshold of mistreatment that is tantamount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2013, para. 10a
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur calls upon all States to:] Review the anti-torture framework in relation to persons with disabilities in line with the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities as authoritative guidance regarding their rights in the context of health-care;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- Persons with disabilities
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 23
- Paragraph text
- The international and regional systems that oversee prison conditions operate largely with a view to preventing torture and other ill-treatment. The Special Rapporteur recalls that, as explained in the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment, the term "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" should be interpreted so as to extend the widest possible protection against abuses.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Certain forms of abuses in health-care settings that may cross a threshold of mistreatment that is tantamount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2013, para. 7c
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur calls upon all States to:] Develop and integrate palliative care into the public health system by including it in all national health plans and policies, curricula and training programmes and developing the necessary standards, guidelines and clinical protocols.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 88f
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur calls upon all States to:] Declare unambiguously that treating all persons deprived of their liberty with humanity and with respect for their dignity is a fundamental and universally applicable rule, the application of which, at a minimum, cannot be dependent on the material resources available in the State party;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Certain forms of abuses in health-care settings that may cross a threshold of mistreatment that is tantamount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2013, para. 8c
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur calls upon all States to:] Establish an effective mechanism for monitoring dependence treatment practices and compliance with international norms;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Environment
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 88b
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur calls upon all States to:] Renew their commitment to humane conditions in any place of deprivation of liberty and implement the minimum standards contained in the Rules on a global level;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 88g
- Paragraph text
- [The Special Rapporteur calls upon all States to:] Address and prevent detention conditions, treatment and punishment of persons deprived of their liberty that amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 49
- Paragraph text
- The fundamental role of authorities to exercise effective control over places of deprivation of liberty and ensure the personal safety of prisoners from physical, sexual or emotional abuse should be further strengthened as one of the most important obligations (see the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Women Prisoners and Non-custodial Measures for Women Offenders, para. 9, and the European Prison Rules, rule 52.2). In this respect, preventive measures include increasing the number of personnel sufficiently trained in using non-violent means of resolving conflicts (see CAT/C/BGR/CO/4-5, para. 23 (c), and A/HRC/7/3/Add.3, para. 90 (t)); promptly and efficiently investigating all reports of inter-prisoner violence and prosecuting and punishing those responsible; and offering protective custody to vulnerable individuals without marginalizing them from the prison population more than is required for their protection. Given the intrusive nature of internal surveillance devices as a control and early warning mechanism, such devices should be administered by specialized security personnel trained to strike a balance between exercising security functions and treating persons with respect for their dignity, including by demonstrating respect for and being sensitive to cultural and religious diversity.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- Women
- Year
- 2013
- Date modified
- Feb 14, 2020
Paragraph