Search Tips
sorted by
30 shown of 558 entities
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 67
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur recognizes that the content of some procedural rights may vary, to a limited extent, depending on the legal status of the interviewee and the context of questioning. The provision of precise and accurate information on one's status and rights before questioning is therefore doubly critical. Authorities may not interview persons as "witnesses" or under the guise of "informative talks" in order to evade the legal safeguards attendant to the questioning of suspects. Any person who is under a legal obligation to attend and remain at an establishment for questioning must be afforded the same rights as a suspect. When a person becomes a suspect during questioning, the interview must be suspended and begin again only if the interviewee has been made aware of this change and has been given a full rundown of his or her rights and is able to fully exercise them (European directive 2013/48/EU).
- 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 added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 70
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur is concerned that, in many jurisdictions, access to a lawyer during questioning is routinely denied or unduly delayed until confessions or incriminating statements are elicited. The protocol must adequately reflect the prohibition on interviewing persons without counsel, except in compelling circumstances or when the interviewee gives his or her voluntary and fully informed consent to waive this right (see the United Nations Principles and Guidelines on Access to Legal Aid in Criminal Justice Systems; A/68/295; and E/CN.4/813 and Corr.1), and reiterate that access to counsel must be enjoyed by anyone deprived of liberty, regardless of whether the offence in question is considered "minor" or "serious".
- 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 added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 71
- Paragraph text
- Compelling circumstances denying access to counsel must be strictly defined in national law and correspond to situations in which there is an urgent need to avert serious adverse consequences for the life, liberty or physical integrity of persons, or where immediate action by investigators is imperative to prevent the destruction or alteration of essential evidence or to prevent interference with witnesses. Even then, the questioning of suspects without a lawyer must be accompanied by appropriate safeguards, limited to what is strictly necessary to achieve its singular purpose (i.e., obtaining information to address the exigent circumstances) and cannot unduly prejudice the rights of the defence (European directive 2013/48/EU). Defence rights are in principle irreparably prejudiced when incriminating statements made during questioning in the absence of counsel are used for a conviction (see European Court of Human Rights, Salduz v. Turkey).
- 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 added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 74
- Paragraph text
- The protocol should further provide practical guidance on the role, rights and responsibilities of lawyers in relation to questioning, including, for example, advice on - and a rundown of potential consequences of - exercising the right to remain silent. It must affirm that counsel must be physically present and able to intervene during interviews to protect the interviewee's rights and ensure fair treatment. Lawyers should be allowed to ask questions, request clarifications, challenge improper or unfair questioning and advise clients without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference. Lawyers cannot, however, prevent interviewees from answering questions that they wish to answer, reply on their behalf or otherwise unduly interfere with 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
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 77
- Paragraph text
- Concern is expressed about the drawing of negative inferences from a person's failure to answer questions, and it is recommended that no inferences be drawn "at least where the accused has not had prior consultations with counsel" (see CCPR/C/IRL/CO/3). The Rome Statute and the Guidelines on the Conditions of Arrest, Police Custody and Pre-Trial Detention in Africa (Luanda Guidelines) expressly prohibit adverse inferences being drawn at trial from a suspect's exercise of the right to remain silent, finding that anything to the contrary may improperly imply that a suspect's silence amounts to an admission of guilt and compromise the presumption of innocence.
- 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 added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 78
- Paragraph text
- The right to remain silent should equally apply, as a matter of law or policy, to prisoners of war, criminal detention relating to an armed conflict, detention of individuals considered to be civilian internees under international humanitarian law and administrative detention outside of armed conflict. With regard to interviews of witnesses and victims in the criminal justice system, courts alone may compel witness testimony. As a preventive measure against coercion and a matter of good practice, witnesses and victims should not be obliged to answer individual questions by which they could incriminate themselves during interviews.
- 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 added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 82
- Paragraph text
- Witnesses, victims, suspects and persons deprived of liberty who do not adequately speak or understand the language of questioning should be entitled to receive the free assistance of an independent, qualified and effective interpreter during interviews and, when necessary, during consultations with counsel (see International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 14 (3) (f)). Persons with sensory impairments likewise have the right to interpreters. When no interpreter is available, a person who knows the interviewee and is able to adequately communicate with him or her may be invited to act as one; alternatively, the interviewee should be asked and/or be allowed to answer questions in writing in his or her preferred language.
- 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 added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 84
- Paragraph text
- The recording of interviews is a fundamental safeguard against torture, ill treatment and coercion and ought to apply in the criminal justice system and in connection to any form of detention. Every reasonable effort must be made to record interviews, by audio or video, in their entirety. Where circumstances preclude or when the interviewee objects to electronic recording, the reasons should be stated in writing and a comprehensive written record of questioning must be kept. Accurate records of all interviews must be kept and safely stored, and evidence from non recorded interviews should be excluded from court proceedings (see A/56/156).
- 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 added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 89
- Paragraph text
- Examples of other safeguards against mistreatment and coercion during questioning include ensuring that no interview occurs without direct or indirect supervision, among others by way of one-sided mirrors, live-feed or review of recordings. Save exceptional circumstances, strict national regulations must ensure that detained persons may not be subjected to questioning for more than two hours without a break and must be provided adequate breaks for refreshments and be allowed uninterrupted periods of at least eight hours for rest - free from questioning or any activity in connection with the investigation - every 24 hours. Save in compelling circumstances, no interview should happen at night.
- 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 added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 91
- Paragraph text
- Victim of torture or ill-treatment must have access to impartial and effective complaint mechanisms and be protected from retaliation and reprisals. All complaints of mistreatment must be transmitted without screening to external independent bodies for prompt, impartial, thorough and effective investigation. Even in the absence of complaints, States have a duty to conduct investigations wherever there are reasonable grounds to believe that an act of torture or ill treatment occurred in any territory under their jurisdiction (see Committee against Torture, general comment No. 3 (2012) on the implementation of article 14 by States parties; and A/68/295).
- 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 added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 96
- Paragraph text
- Statements, documentary or other evidence elicited through torture and ill treatment are inadmissible in any proceedings, except against suspected perpetrators. The exclusionary rule is a non-derogable norm of customary international law. It is fundamental to uphold the prohibition of torture and ill treatment by providing a disincentive to them. The rule applies to mistreatment of both suspects and third parties, including witnesses, and against evidence obtained in a third State, and regardless of whether the evidence is corroborated or is uniquely decisive for the case. The exclusionary rule applies in full to the collecting, sharing and receiving of any information tainted by mistreatment (see A/HRC/25/60).
- 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
- All
- Year
- 2016
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 100
- Paragraph text
- National laws must provide for the exclusion of all evidence obtained in violation of safeguards designed to prevent mistreatment (see A/HRC/25/60), such as confessions or incriminating statements obtained in violation of one's rights to be informed of his or her rights and legal status before questioning, or duly warned that his or her words may be recorded and used in evidence against him or her. Evidence should also be excluded when access to counsel is unduly delayed or denied, or involuntarily waived; whenever specific safeguards applicable to the questioning of vulnerable persons are infringed; and when persons are denied adequate breaks and periods of rest during interviews save compelling circumstances. The protocol should account for situations where evidence or information is obtained in violation of preventive safeguards and the accused takes a plea without trial.
- 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
- 2016
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 101
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur calls upon States to spearhead the development of a universal protocol aiming to ensure that no person is subjected to torture, ill treatment or coercion, including any forms of violence, duress or threat. A protocol, to be developed in collaboration with relevant international and regional human rights mechanisms, civil society and experts, must be grounded in fundamental principles of international human rights law and foremost in the absolute prohibition of torture and ill-treatment. The first step in this process ought to be the convening of a broad public consultation designed to set the parameters for the collaborative development of the protocol by the relevant stakeholders.
- 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
- 2016
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 103
- Paragraph text
- The protocol ought to elaborate on a fundamental set of standards and procedural safeguards designed to protect the physical and mental integrity of all persons during questioning. In this respect, the Special Rapporteur calls upon States to consider adopting the elements considered herein (without prejudice to other elements suggested by experts and stakeholders), which should apply, as a matter of law and policy, at a minimum, to all interviews by law enforcement officials and other intelligence, military and administrative bodies with an investigative mandate, as well to those conducted by private contractors and other proxy agents of the State. The protocol should also provide for accountability mechanisms and appropriate remedies for victims.
- 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 added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment 2016, para. 53
- Paragraph text
- States' due diligence obligations to ensure redress remain intact when non-State actors perpetrate conflict-related sexual violence. Gender-sensitive practices must be employed when investigating violations during and after the armed conflict. Silence or lack of resistance cannot be used to imply consent, which furthermore cannot be inferred from the words or conduct of a victim who was subjected to force, threats, or a coercive environment (A/HRC/7/3). Comprehensive assistance and reparations programmes in these contexts often require years to be fully implemented.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Gender
- Humanitarian
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 68
- Paragraph text
- The right of access to counsel is one of the most essential safeguards against torture and ill-treatment. Not only does a lawyer's presence act as a deterrent against mistreatment or coercion and facilitate the undertaking of remedial action if mistreatment occurs, but also can protect officials facing unfounded allegations of improper conduct.
- 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 added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 36
- Paragraph text
- States bear the main responsibility for implementing international human rights standards, including the prohibition of torture. However, torture occurs because national legal frameworks are deficient and do not properly codify torture as a crime with appropriate sanctions. Torture persists because national criminal systems lack the essential procedural safeguards to prevent its occurrence, to effectively investigate allegations and to bring perpetrators to justice. Moreover, torture remains entrenched because of a climate of tolerance of excessive use of force by law enforcement officials in many countries.
- 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
- 2010
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 44
- Paragraph text
- In certain cases, the definition of torture in national criminal law is too narrow and/or leaves out important elements established in article 1 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. In the case of Mongolia, the definition fails to include any of the essential elements of torture, including that the act (or omission) causes severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, that it is intentionally inflicted for a specific purpose and by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official acting in an official capacity. Article 251 of the Mongolian Code of Criminal Procedure was amended in 2008 but the provision does not apply to all public officials or persons acting in an official capacity.
- 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
- 2010
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 61
- Paragraph text
- Following the obligations of States to prevent torture and to hold perpetrators accountable, article 14 of the Convention against Torture stipulates that each State party shall ensure in its legal system that victims of torture obtain redress and have an enforceable right to fair and adequate compensation including the means for as full rehabilitation as possible. That obligation includes the establishment and support of torture rehabilitation centres. That duty was further emphasized by the Commission on Human Rights in its resolution 2004/41, in which it stressed that "national legal systems should ensure that victims of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment obtain redress and are awarded fair and adequate compensation and receive appropriate socio-medical rehabilitation". In that regard the Commission encouraged "the development of rehabilitation centres for victims 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
- 2010
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 63
- Paragraph text
- In order to fully appreciate the importance of the work of torture rehabilitation centres, one has to recall the devastating impact of torture on human beings. For most victims, the experience of their ordeal will remain present for the rest of their lives, if not physically then at least mentally. Often, the psychological impact of torture amounts to what has been described as a "disintegration of the personality". The harm inflicted may be so profound that it shatters the very identity of a person, the ability to feel any joy or hope, to engage with his or her environment, or to find any meaning in life. Depression, anxiety disorders including flash-backs, loss of self-respect, cognitive impairment and suicidal tendencies are only some of the consequences of torture. The impact of the abuse is rarely limited to the person directly targeted but also victimizes their families and even their communities. The victims' inability to resume their work further adds to their social seclusion and financial strain. In general, experiences of torture cannot be entirely "left behind", let alone forgotten.
- 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
- 2010
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 66
- Paragraph text
- Rehabilitation centres also assume a decisive role in holding perpetrators accountable. With their forensic expertise they ensure that torture traumas, whether visible or invisible, are scrupulously documented before they disappear. Even if, at the time of the examination, it may seem unlikely that proceedings will be held, adequate records can eventually constitute crucial evidence in later criminal or civil cases. In this regard, the Manual on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Istanbul Protocol) provides an important standard for the documentation of abuse, which goes beyond the therapeutic purpose in a narrow sense. Medical records can be instrumental in overcoming the otherwise lack of objective evidence with which survivors of torture are so commonly confronted, given that torture mostly takes place without witnesses. They provide evidence which can corroborate the victim's account of the ordeal. Establishing the facts of torture before a court and holding perpetrators accountable can give torture survivors a sense of justice and facilitate both a coming to terms with their past suffering and a comprehensive process of healing. Additionally, monetary compensation as a result of civil proceedings may provide the necessary funds for additional medical treatment. Acknowledging the importance of the Istanbul Protocol, the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims and the Turkish Medical Association, together with the Government of Turkey, concluded last year the training of 4,000 medical doctors, 1,000 prosecutors and 500 judges.
- 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
- 2010
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 70
- Paragraph text
- Rehabilitation centres deserve appreciation and full support for their courage and for the determination with which they continue against the odds to accept patients and care for them in an uncompromising manner. While some medical institutions, such as State hospitals, may succumb to pressure exerted by the police or the military and turn a blind eye when it comes to documenting torture, the rehabilitation centres rigorously and consistently uphold professional and ethical medical standards. Ultimately, to attack a torture rehabilitation centre is to attack the victims of torture who have already suffered abuse and are in need of 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
- Humanitarian
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2010
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 89
- Paragraph text
- In order to combat increasing levels of crime, terrorism and other forms of organized crime effectively, Governments in too many countries seem willing to restrict certain human rights by granting their law enforcement, intelligence and security forces very extensive powers. This leads to an environment conducive to undermining the absolute prohibition of torture. The brutalization of many societies has reached a level where torture is simply regarded by Governments and the population at large as the "lesser evil". This trend is alarming. There is a need for a new global awareness-raising campaign to change this climate of tolerance towards excessive use of force by law enforcement officials. Governments need to be reminded that torture is not an effective means of combating crime. On the contrary, it contributes to the further brutalization of societies and the spiral of violence which many societies suffer from. Torture is nothing other than an act of barbarism.
- 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
- 2010
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Overview of main observations of five years fact-finding and research 2010, para. 43
- Paragraph text
- The term "torture" should not be used in an inflammatory manner. It is reserved for one of the worst possible human rights violations and abuses human beings can inflict upon each other, and therefore carries a special stigma. It therefore holds a special position in international law: it is absolutely prohibited and this prohibition is non-derogable. Where torture has been inflicted, it is a very serious crime against a human being, who most likely will suffer from its consequences for the rest of his or her life, either physically or mentally. According to the definition contained in the Convention against Torture, four elements are needed in order for an act to be qualified as torture: firstly, an act inflicting severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental; secondly, the element of intent; thirdly, the specific purpose; and lastly, the involvement of a State official, at least by acquiescence.
- 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
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2010
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Overview of main observations of five years fact-finding and research 2010, para. 47
- Paragraph text
- It is disappointing to see that the few perpetrators who are held accountable are punished with sentences far below what is required by international law. While the Committee against Torture, in its State reporting procedure, has interpreted the obligation for an adequate punishment as a long-term prison sentence with a penalty of up to 20 years, the Special Rapporteur's fact-finding missions have shown that perpetrators, if held accountable at all, were predominantly punished with disciplinary sanctions and light or suspended prison sentences. The forms of discipline do not normally go beyond demotion, delayed promotion or pay freeze. These sanctions are an affront to the victims, lack any meaningful acknowledgment of their suffering, are devoid of any deterrent effect and, therefore, put further persons at risk.
- 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
- 2010
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Overview of main observations of five years fact-finding and research 2010, para. 50
- Paragraph text
- All too often, the safeguards required by international human rights law are either not foreseen or not effective.
- 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 added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Overview of main observations of five years fact-finding and research 2010, para. 55
- Paragraph text
- One of the major challenges when it comes to proving cases of torture and ill-treatment is the gathering of evidence. Since abuses are mainly inflicted behind closed doors, victims most often have an uphill struggle to make their cases heard and get their complaints properly considered. This is particularly the case for persons who are accused of having committed a crime and carry the stigma of not being credible and trying to avoid justice by complaining about their treatment. Forensic medical science is a crucial tool in addressing this problem, since it can establish the degree of correlation of the medical findings with the allegations brought forward and therefore provide evidence on which prosecutions can be based. Modern medical examinations can help to detect injuries which are otherwise not visible, such as soft tissue or nerve trauma - essential in light of the ever increasing sophistication of torture methods.
- 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
- 2010
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Overview of main observations of five years fact-finding and research 2010, para. 57
- Paragraph text
- As torture often leaves indelible traces on the body - or in the minds - of the victims, reparation can almost never be complete. However, article 14 of the Convention against Torture requires each State party to ensure in its legal system that the victim of an act of torture obtains redress and has an enforceable right to fair and adequate compensation, including the means for as full a rehabilitation as possible. This is a specific manifestation of the general right of victims of human rights violations to a remedy and adequate reparation, as laid down in various international and regional human rights treaties and should also apply to victims of other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Consequently, reparation has to encompass several aspects. What victims perceive as fair and adequate reparation for the ordeals they had to endure may differ from case to case. In the Special Rapporteur's experience, victims of torture are not primarily interested in monetary compensation, but in having their dignity restored. Public acknowledgment of the harm and humiliation caused and the establishment of the truth together with a public apology may often provide greater satisfaction than monetary compensation. For many torture survivors, justice is only perceived as such when criminal prosecution has lead to an appropriate punishment of the perpetrators. Most victims of torture are in urgent need of long-term medical and psychological rehabilitation in specialized treatment centres where they feel secure. The amount of monetary compensation must therefore include any economically assessable damage, such as the costs of long-term rehabilitation measures and compensation for lost opportunities, including employment, education and social benefits. In addition to reparation tailored to the needs of the individual victim, States are also obliged to adopt more general guarantees of non-repetition, such as taking resolute steps to fight impunity through, for example, the revision of amnesty laws, the establishment of independent investigation units or promotion of the observance of codes of conducts for law enforcement officials.
- 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
- 2010
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Overview of main observations of five years fact-finding and research 2010, para. 60
- Paragraph text
- Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and relevant provisions of regional human rights treaties prohibit not only torture, but also cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, which is separately proscribed in article 16 of the Convention against Torture. As is the case of the prohibition of torture, the prohibition of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is non-derogable. While the Convention against Torture expressly defines torture, there is no such definition of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in international treaties. Consequently, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is commonly distinguished from torture with reference to article 1 of the Convention against Torture. However, as the Special Rapporteur has argued before, 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. 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. Cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, on the other hand, means the infliction of pain or suffering without purpose or intention and outside a situation where a person is under the de facto control of another. It follows that one may distinguish between justifiable and non-justifiable treatment causing severe suffering. Examples where causing severe suffering may be justifiable are the lawful use of force by the police in the exercise of law enforcement policies (e.g. arrest of a criminal suspect, dissolution of a violent demonstration) and of the military in an armed conflict. In such situations, the principle of proportionality has to be strictly observed. If the use of force is not necessary and, in the particular circumstances of the case, disproportional to the purpose achieved, it amounts to cruel or inhuman treatment. In a situation where one person is under the de facto control of another and thus powerless, the test of proportionality is no longer applicable. Other situations which may amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment are particularly severe conditions of detention, domestic violence, female genital mutilation and trafficking in human beings. This means that, in principle, all forms of cruel or inhuman treatment or punishment, including torture, require the infliction of severe pain or suffering. This is different for the qualification of degrading treatment or punishment only in the sense of article 16 of the Convention against Torture, which arises from humiliation of the victim even if the pain or suffering is not severe.
- 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
- 2010
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 25
- Paragraph text
- There is no universally agreed upon definition of solitary confinement. The Istanbul Statement on the Use and Effects of Solitary Confinement defines solitary confinement as the physical isolation of individuals who are confined to their cells for 22 to 24 hours a day. In many jurisdictions, prisoners held in solitary confinement are allowed out of their cells for one hour of solitary exercise a day. Meaningful contact with other people is typically reduced to a minimum. The reduction in stimuli is not only quantitative but also qualitative. The available stimuli and the occasional social contacts are seldom freely chosen, generally monotonous, and often not empathetic.
- 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
- 2011
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph