Search Tips
sorted by
30 shown of 51 entities
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 42
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur therefore aims to clarify how terms such as "torture", "cruel", "inhuman" and "degrading" should be interpreted within the context of extra-custodial use of force, particularly in view of potential justifications such as law enforcement, crowd control, or self-defence or defence of others. He will also examine how this subject area interrelates with the protection of other fundamental rights such as, most notably, the right of peaceful assembly, freedom of expression and the right to life. Further, the Special Rapporteur plans 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
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 55
- Paragraph text
- Another issue arising with regard to certain “less lethal” weapons is their indiscriminate effects, which make it difficult to restrict the use of force and the resulting harm as required by the principles of necessity and proportionality, particularly in the presence of innocent bystanders (for example, in crowd control or hostage-taking). While the indiscriminate nature of a weapon alone does not necessarily make it cruel, inhuman or degrading, it may do so in conjunction with the gravity of its effects (for example, certain kinetic impact projectiles) or with the circumstances in which it is being used (for example, tear gas in closed confinements).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Humanitarian
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 40
- Paragraph text
- In Cestaro v. Italy and Bartesaghi Gallo and Others v. Italy, the European Court of Human Rights found that the violent punching, kicking and beating with rubber truncheons of antiglobalization protestors amounted to torture. The Court noted that although none of the victims showed violence or resistance, and although all of them were manifestly unarmed, asleep or sitting with their hands raised above their heads, the police systematically and indiscriminately subjected each of them to violent beatings, intentionally inflicting severe physical and psychological suffering for purposes of retaliation and humiliation through the use of excessive, indiscriminate and manifestly disproportionate 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
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2017
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 53
- Paragraph text
- Therefore, the first priority of the Special Rapporteur will be to unequivocally reaffirm the absolute and universal prohibition of all, and any, forms of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, to further clarify the contours and meaning of these terms in the light of the evolving challenges marking the contemporary international environment, and to call on States and non-State actors alike to renounce, and to prevent impunity for, any such practice.
- 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
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 47
- Paragraph text
- The legal equation changes fundamentally when it comes to intentional and purposeful infliction of pain or suffering on a powerless person. Intentionality and purposefulness involve the deliberate instrumentalization of the pain or suffering inflicted on a powerless person as a vehicle for achieving a particular purpose (for example, coercion, intimidation, punishment, discrimination or sadistic gratification), as opposed to the infliction of pain and suffering as an inevitable side effect of an act pursuing a different purpose (for example, a medical intervention, effecting an arrest or repelling an attack). Powerlessness means that the victim is 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. In such circumstances, there can be no justification for the intentional and purposeful infliction of pain or suffering, regardless of whether, under the relevant treaty definition, it qualifies as torture or “other” cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In the view of the Special Rapporteur, the deliberate instrumentalization of pain or suffering, in conjunction with the powerlessness of the victim, are the very essence of torture and of the fundamental attack on human dignity it represents. Thus, notwithstanding any additional elements that may be required for a formal qualification as “torture” under the applicable treaty definition, any extra-custodial use of force that involves the intentional and purposeful infliction of pain or suffering on a powerless person as a vehicle for achieving a particular purpose will always amount to an aggravated form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of considerations of lawful purpose, necessity or proportionality and irrespective of its qualification as torture under the applicable treaty definition.
- 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 14
- Paragraph text
- At the same time, the Special Rapporteur cannot ignore a troubling discrepancy between, on the one hand, the professed consensus opinions, solemn declarations and commitments made by States at the diplomatic level and, on the other hand, the disillusioning reality of millions of victims of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Despite more than three decades of dedicated work of the mandate and countless other international, governmental and non-governmental stakeholders, torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment are still rampant in most, if not all, parts of the world. The Special Rapporteur observes with alarm that, since the turn of the century, the rise of transnational terrorism, organized crime and other actual or perceived threats has given way to an increasing tolerance of violent political narratives and popular beliefs that not only trivialize torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, but even promote and incite their use in the name of national security and the fight against terrorism.
- 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
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 38
- Paragraph text
- The Committee against Torture has repeatedly held that police brutality and excessive use of force outside the context of detention can fall within its purview (for example, A/50/44, para. 126, CAT/C/VEN/CO/3-4, para. 12, CAT/C/TUR/CO/4, para. 15, and CAT/C/KOR/CO/3-5, para. 13). In V.L. v. Switzerland, a case involving multiple rapes, the Committee noted that “the complainant was clearly under the physical control of the police even though the acts concerned were perpetrated outside formal detention facilities” (CAT/C/37/D/262/2005, annex, para. 8.10). It found that State agents had inflicted severe pain and suffering on her, for purposes such as interrogation, intimidation, punishment, humiliation and discrimination based on gender, and concluded that “the sexual abuse by the police in this case constitutes torture even though it was perpetrated outside formal detention facilities” (ibid.).
- 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
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 66c
- Paragraph text
- [States should ensure that all law enforcement officials are trained, equipped and instructed so as to prevent any extra-custodial use of force amounting to torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In particular, States should:] Equip law enforcement officials with communication devices and protective equipment such as shields, helmets, bulletproof vests and bulletproof means of transportation, with a view to prioritizing the de-escalation of any potential violence and decreasing the need to use weapons of any kind;
- 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
- All
- Year
- 2017
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
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
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 16
- Paragraph text
- The absolute and non-derogable nature of the torture prohibition in international law reflects the exceptional gravity of the crime, which constitutes an immoral affront to human dignity that can never be justified. Torture dehumanizes and denies the inherent dignity of victims by treating their bodies and minds as means to achieving particular ends. It constitutes one of the most extreme forms of suffering that a person can inflict on another and often results in lifelong consequences 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
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 21
- Paragraph text
- Torture, ill-treatment and coercion have devastating long-term consequences for individuals, institutions and society as a whole, causing serious and long-lasting harm to victims and often injuring the humanity and mental health of perpetrators. Such practices corrupt the cultures of institutions that perpetrate, participate in, assist in or overlook them. They debase societies that endorse or accept their use, erode public trust in law enforcement and damage its relationships with communities, with negative consequences for future investigations.
- 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
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment 2016, para. 71
- Paragraph text
- With regard to trafficking, the Special Rapporteur calls upon States to ensure that appropriate frameworks are in place for the identification, investigation and prosecution of trafficking-related human rights violations; duly investigate, prosecute and punish public officials for their role in trafficking operations; establish a combination of comprehensive gender- and age-sensitive measures to protect, support and rehabilitate victims; and avoid detention of victims for status-related offences and for "protective" purposes.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Gender
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment 2016, para. 72e
- Paragraph text
- [With regard to abuses in health-care settings, the Special Rapporteur calls upon States to:] Outlaw forced or coerced sterilization in all circumstances and provide special protection to individuals belonging to marginalized groups; and ensure that health-care providers obtain free, full and informed consent for such procedures and fully explain the risks, benefits and alternatives in a comprehensible format, without resorting to threats or inducements, in every case;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Health
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
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
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
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 90
- Paragraph text
- Accountability is critical to preventing the recurrence of human rights violations. The protocol must reiterate States' obligations to combat impunity and ensure accountability and the provision of remedies for torture and ill-treatment committed during 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
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment 2016, para. 52
- Paragraph text
- State and non-State actors alike commonly commit acts of sexual violence during international and non-international armed conflicts (S/2015/203). Sexual violence during conflict is often a product of gender stereotypes that are prevalent in societies during peacetime. Rape and other forms of sexual violence constitute violations of international humanitarian law and unequivocally amount to torture under international criminal law jurisprudence. Under international humanitarian law, torture constitutes a breach of the laws and customs of war and may be committed by both States and non-State armed groups. More recent developments in international criminal law have determined that torture can occur when the State had no role in its perpetration and where the State did not fail to exercise due diligence obligations, with the "characteristic trait of the offence [being] found in the nature of the act committed rather than in the status of the person who committed it". The Special Rapporteur welcomes these developments and finds that the international humanitarian and criminal law frameworks complement the application of international human rights law, particularly with regard to conflict situations, wherein the control typically exercised by States in peacetime is either lacking or has been replaced by other elements of control, such as insurgent groups or militias.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Humanitarian
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
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
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 9
- Paragraph text
- The persistent use of unlawful and improper interviewing practices is triggered by a range of local factors, including the erroneous assumption that mistreatment and coercion are necessary to obtain confessions or elicit information. The misconception that torture is a "necessary evil" is especially prevalent during interviews relating to organized crime and national security offences. In the anti terrorism context, Governments resort to "ticking bomb scenarios" in attempts to justify the use of abusive and unlawful interviewing practices, implicitly challenging the absolute and non-derogable nature of the torture prohibition under any circumstances. While some have sought to proffer faulty legal interpretations to support the use of torture, a more common policy option has been to refute that certain practices amount to torture or ill-treatment under international 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
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 15
- Paragraph text
- The perpetuation of unlawful practices is exacerbated by an absence of determination and commitment to eradicate torture at all times and in all circumstances; a lack of adequate education and training for law enforcement, intelligence, military and medical personnel; deficient complaint, monitoring and investigative mechanisms, and inadequate responses to allegations and complaints; interference with the ability of national monitoring bodies and civil society to gain access to detention places, document violations and represent victims of abuse; and cultures of impunity and pervasive failure to ensure accountability and provide adequate remedies.
- 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
- 2016
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. 64
- Paragraph text
- A significant number of States lack an independent mechanism to monitor human rights violations not only in detention facilities but also in medical and social care institutions. Moreover, even when legislation exists to provide for the monitoring of such institutions, inadequate human and financial resources and weak legal enforcement mechanisms are no excuse for failure to prevent abuse.
- 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
- Person(s) affected
- All
- Persons on the move
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 53
- Paragraph text
- There is State responsibility for complicity in torture when one State gives assistance to another State in the commission of torture or other ill-treatment, or acquiesces in such acts, in the knowledge (including imputed knowledge) of the real risk that torture or ill-treatment will take place or has taken place, and aids and assists the torturing State in maintaining impunity for the acts of torture or ill-treatment. A State would thus be responsible when it was aware of the risk that information was obtained by torture or other ill-treatment, or ought to have been aware of that risk and did not take reasonable steps to prevent it. Moreover, the Special Rapporteur finds that the assistance provided by States does not have to have a substantial effect on the perpetration of the crime of torture itself for it to be regarded as responsible.
- 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
- 2014
Paragraph