Search Tips
sorted by
30 shown of 35 entities
7 columns hidden
Title | Date added | Template | Original document | Paragraph text | Body | Document type | Thematics | Topic(s) | Person(s) affected | Year |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
The death penalty and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 2012, para. 42 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | 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. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2012 | ||
Overview of working methods and vision 2011, para. 49 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | 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. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2011 | ||
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment
or punishment 2016, para. 74a | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | [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; | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2016 | ||
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 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | [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; | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2015 | ||
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 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | 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. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2015 | ||
Commissions of inquiry 2012, para. 51a | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | [According to the Principles on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the main purposes of effective investigation and documentation of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment are:] Clarification of the facts and establishment and acknowledgement of individual and State responsibility for victims and their families; | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2012 | ||
Commissions of inquiry 2012, para. 30 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | Commissions of inquiry may satisfy some of the needs of victims for adequate healing and remedy by providing them with a public venue to tell their stories. In this context, commissions of inquiry may also aid in providing closure for family members of victims. Generally speaking, commissions of inquiry also deliver their findings in a timely manner, enhancing the victim-centred approach of this mechanism, especially when compared with judicial proceedings that ordinarily take much longer. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2012 | ||
The death penalty and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 2012, para. 40 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | The method of firing squad has so far been considered as the fastest way of execution and as not causing severe pain and suffering. However, executions conducted in public often expose convicts to undignified and shameful displays of contempt and hatred. Conversely, secret executions violate the rights of the convict and family members to prepare for death. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2012 | ||
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 75 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | The ultimate aim must be to prevent acts of torture and ill-treatment before they occur. There are numerous methods of prevention that have been developed in the past, which, if adequately implemented by States, could easily eradicate torture: abolition of secret and incommunicado detention; proper registration of every detainee from the moment of arrest or apprehension; prompt access to legal counsel within 24 hours; access to relatives; prompt access to an independent judge; presumption of innocence; prompt and independent medical examination of all detainees; video/audio recording of all interrogations; no detention under the control of the interrogators or investigators for more than 48 hours; prompt, impartial and effective investigation of all allegations or suspicions of torture; inadmissibility of evidence obtained under torture; and effective training of all officials involved in the custody, interrogation and medical care of detainees. As previously emphasized by the Special Rapporteur and his predecessors, the most effective preventive measure against torture and ill-treatment is the regular inspection of places of detention. Regular inspections can ensure the adequate implementation of the above-mentioned safeguards against torture, create a strong deterrent effect and provide a means to generate timely and adequate responses to allegations of torture and ill-treatment by law enforcement officials. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2010 | ||
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment
or punishment 2016, para. 51 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | It is well established that rape and other forms of sexual violence can amount to torture and ill-treatment. Rape constitutes torture when it is carried out by, at the instigation of, or with the consent or acquiescence of public officials (A/HRC/7/3). States are responsible for the acts of private actors when States fail to exercise due diligence to prevent, stop or sanction them, or to provide reparations to victims. In addition to physical trauma, the mental pain and suffering inflicted on victims of rape and other forms of sexual violence is often long-lasting due, inter alia, to subsequent stigmatization and isolation. This is particularly true in cases where the victim is shunned or formally banished from the family or community. Victims can also face difficulties in establishing or maintaining intimate relationships and a variety of other consequences, including sexually transmitted diseases, inability to bear children, unwanted pregnancy, miscarriage and forced or denial of abortion (A/HRC/7/3). Torture and ill-treatment of persons on the basis of actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity is rampant in armed conflict and perpetrated by State and non-State actors alike, with rape and other forms of sexual violence sometimes being used as a form of "moral cleansing" of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons (S/2015/203, A/HRC/25/65). | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2016 | ||
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 45 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | International and regional human rights mechanisms have to date developed an extensive body of jurisprudence on practices that amount to physical or psychological torture or ill-treatment, including but not limited to punching, kicking, beatings, electrocution, forms of suffocation, burns, use of firearms, mock executions, threats of reprisals against relatives, death threats, restraints in very painful conditions, rape, sexual abuse and humiliation, sleep deprivation, prolonged stress positions, prolonged solitary confinement, incommunicado detention, sensory deprivation, exposure to extreme temperatures or loud music for prolonged periods, dietary adjustments, blindfolding and hooding during questioning, prolonged questioning sessions, removal of clothing, deprivation of all comfort and religious items and exploitation of phobias during questioning (see A/HRC/13/39/Add.5; A/52/44; CCPR/C/USA/CO/3/Rev.1; CAT/C/USA/CO/2; and CAT/C/KAZ/CO/3). Deplorably, such illegal methods have often been combined with poor conditions of detention - which can alone amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in themselves - to exert additional psychological pressure on detainees to reveal information. The Special Rapporteur recalls that the physical environment and conditions during questioning must be adequate, humane and free from intimidation, so as not to run afoul of the prohibition of torture or ill-treatment. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2016 | ||
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 45 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | Finally, the Court repeatedly found States to have violated their duty to protect persons from torture and other inhuman or degrading treatment by, for example, failing to provide an adequate legal framework against rape or to protect applicants from a real and immediate risk of ill-treatment at the hands of an abusive family member. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2017 | ||
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 12 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | In some jurisdictions, structural and resource deficiencies in the criminal justice system create conditions conducive to the proliferation of mistreatment. When Governments do not invest sufficient resources in the administration of justice, judges, prosecutors and law enforcement officials lack the necessary training and are overworked, underpaid and more prone to corruption (see A/HRC/13/39/Add.5). Under such circumstances, it is not uncommon for law enforcement officials to resort to torture or threats of torture to extract money from detainees or their relatives during investigations. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2016 | ||
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 43 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | The maintenance of an official registry has been and remains one of the fundamental safeguards against torture or other ill-treatment. Although Rule 7 provides for an obligation to ensure proper registration, it lacks a provision obliging strict adherence to registration from the very moment of apprehension and transfer to police custody; the duty to have a comprehensive and accessible record of everyone deprived of liberty (International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, art. 17 (3)); information regarding the time and place of arrest as well as the identity of the arresting officials; the state of health upon arrival at the detention centre; and records of when the next of kin and a lawyer were contacted and visited the detainee. It also lacks a provision requiring accurate information about the custody and whereabouts of persons, including transfers, available promptly to the detainee, his or her relatives and his or her counsel (Body of Principles, principle 12), as well as registration of information on the circumstances of death of prisoners and the location of their remains (International Convention on Enforced Disappearance, art. 17 (3) (g)). Furthermore, Rule 7 (2), which obliges prison authorities to not receive a person in an institution without a valid commitment order, should be revised. The detainee should be admitted into a lawful place of detention and the person in charge of that institution is responsible for admitting the person concerned and immediately notifying a judge. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2013 | ||
The death penalty and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 2012, para. 80f | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | [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 respect the rights of the families and relatives of persons sentenced to death. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2012 | ||
The death penalty and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 2012, para. 61 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | Accordingly, in Bader and Kanbor v. Sweden (2005), the European Court of Human Rights held that the applicant had a justified and well-founded fear that the death sentence imposed on him after an unfair trial would be enforced if he were compelled to return to his home country, and that since executions were carried out without any public scrutiny or accountability, the surrounding circumstances would inevitably cause him considerable fear and anguish. The Court concluded that the death sentence imposed following an unfair trial would cause the applicant and his family additional fear and anguish as to their future if they were forced to return to the Syrian Arab Republic and, accordingly, would give rise to a violation of articles 2 and 3 (referring to the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment) of the European Convention. In Ocalan v. Turkey (2005), the European Court held that the fear and uncertainty about the future generated by a death sentence, when a real possibility existed that the sentence would be enforced, inevitably caused strong human anguish. Such anguish could not be disassociated from the unfairness of the proceedings underlying the sentence, which, given that human life was at stake, became unlawful under the Convention. Consequently, the imposition of the death sentence following an unfair trial by a court whose independence and impartiality were open to doubt was held to amount to inhuman treatment, in violation of article 3 of the European Convention. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2012 | ||
Overview of main observations of five years fact-finding and research 2010, para. 58 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | In practice, the right to a remedy and adequate reparation for victims of torture is either non-existent or severely limited, and adequate reparation is almost never provided. In addition, a common problem is that victims and relatives of victims often do not enjoy legal standing in relation to allegations of torture and are therefore prevented from claiming reparation. If at all, medical, psychological and social rehabilitation is usually not provided by Governments responsible for the torture inflicted but by private organizations, usually in the countries that granted asylum to the victims. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2010 | ||
Gender perspectives on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment
or punishment 2016, para. 59 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | Violence committed by family members against relatives in order to protect the family's "honour" is a common practice around the world. In some communities honour is equated with the regulation of female sexuality and with women's conformity with social norms and traditions. Women, girls, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons are the most common victims of honour-based violence, which targets female sexuality and autonomy and individuals' actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity and expression (A/61/122/Add.1 and Corr.1). | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2016 | ||
Torture, ill-treatment and coercion during interviews/ Universal protocol for non-coercive, ethically sound, evidence-based and empirically founded interviewing practices 2016, para. 80 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | With regard to the need to inform persons of their rights during questioning, additional safeguards are required for certain persons, with thorough explanations of the rights of children and persons with intellectual or psychosocial disabilities being provided directly to, among others, their parents, families, guardians or legal representatives (see general comment No. 35; and Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Tibi v. Ecuador). | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2016 | ||
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 82 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | Children deprived of their liberty and their parents or legal representatives should have avenues of complaint open to them in administrative systems, and should be entitled to address complaints confidentially to an independent authority. Upon admission, children should be given information on lodging a complaint, including the contact details of the authorities competent to receive complaints, as well as the address of any services that provide legal assistance. In this context, the Special Rapporteur welcomes the establishment of independent, local, socio-legal defence centres that provide children with the effective opportunity to have access to justice and subsequently to obtain remedies and advocate for systematic training in children's rights for professionals. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2015 | ||
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 80 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | Within the context of administrative immigration enforcement, it is now clear that the deprivation of liberty of children based on their or their parents' migration status is never in the best interests of the child, exceeds the requirement of necessity, becomes grossly disproportionate and may constitute cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of migrant children. Following the advisory opinion of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the rights and guarantees of children in the context of migration and/or in need of international protection in 2014, the Special Rapporteur recalls the different procedural purposes between immigration and criminal proceedings, and that, in the words of the Court, "the offenses concerning the entry or stay in one country may not, under any circumstances, have the same or similar consequences to those derived from the commission of a crime." The Special Rapporteur therefore concludes that the principle of ultima ratio that applies to juvenile criminal justice is not applicable to immigration proceedings. The deprivation of liberty of children based exclusively on immigration-related reasons exceeds the requirement of necessity because the measure is not absolutely essential to ensure the appearance of children at immigration proceedings or to implement a deportation order. Deprivation of liberty in this context can never be construed as a measure that complies with the child`s best interests. Immigration detention practices across the globe, whether de jure or de facto, put children at risk of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Furthermore, the detention of children who migrate to escape exploitation and abuse contravenes the duty of the State to promote the physical and psychological recovery of child victims in an appropriate environment. Therefore, States should, expeditiously and completely, cease the detention of children, with or without their parents, on the basis of their immigration status. States should make clear in their legislation, policies and practices that the principle of the best interests of the child takes priority over migration policy and other administrative considerations. Also, States should appoint a guardian or adviser as soon as the unaccompanied or separated child is identified, and maintain such guardianship arrangements until the child has either reached the age of majority or has permanently left the territory and/or jurisdiction of the State (A/HRC/20/24, para. 41). While the Special Rapporteur acknowledges that, in certain circumstances it is possible for States to place children in a shelter or other accommodation when it is based on the purpose of child care, protection and support, this should not become a proxy for expanded unnecessary restrictions to the liberty of child migrants and families. States are required to favour measures that promote the care and well-being of the child rather than the deprivation of liberty. Facilities that grant accommodation for migrant children should have all the material conditions necessary and provide an adequate regime to ensure comprehensive protection from ill-treatment and torture, and allow for their holistic development. Migrant children should be separated from children who have been accused or convicted of criminal offences and from adults. The Special Rapporteur notes, however, that separating child migrants from unrelated adults can sometimes itself result in harm by depriving children of important interactions; ample opportunities for broader human interaction and physical activity must therefore be given to unaccompanied migrant children. When children are accompanied, the need to keep the family together is a not sufficient reason to legitimize or justify the deprivation of liberty of a child, given the prejudicial effects that such measures have on the emotional development and physical well-being of children. The Special Rapporteur shares the view of the Inter-American Court of Human | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2015 | ||
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 77 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | An important safeguard against torture and other forms of ill-treatment is the support given to children in detention to maintain contact with parents and family through telephone, electronic or other correspondence, and regular visits at all times. Children should be placed in a facility that is as close as possible to the place of residence of their family. Any exceptions to this requirement should be clearly described in the law and not be left to the discretion of the competent authorities. Moreover, children should be given permission to leave detention facilities for a visit to their home and family, and for educational, vocational or other important reasons. The child's contact with the outside world is an integral part of the human right to humane treatment, and should never be denied as a disciplinary measure. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2015 | ||
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 61 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | In addition, many child migrants suffer appalling and inhuman conditions while detained including overcrowding, inappropriate food, insufficient access to drinking water, unsanitary conditions, lack of adequate medical attention, and irregular access to washing and sanitary facilities and to hygiene products, lack of appropriate accommodation and other basic necessities. In some cases, detention centres refuse to keep migrant children with their families also being detained, and have denied migrant children's right to communicate with their families. Such practices effectively isolate child detainees from social support groups. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2015 | ||
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 43 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | Detaining children and adults together will inevitably result in negative consequences for the children, who are five times as likely to be subjected to a substantiated incident of sexual violence, and are also much more likely to witness or experience other forms of violence, including physical harm by facility staff members. They are also more likely to commit suicide or engage in other forms of self-harm when housed in adult - rather than juvenile - facilities. Research also shows that imprisoning children with adults can result in increased recidivism and negative long-term consequences for children, their families and communities. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2015 | ||
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 40 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | In many instances, the worst situations for children arise at the time of arrest by the police, and during transportation or subsequent questioning in police custody (see A/HRC/16/52/Add.5, para. 43 and A/HRC/22/53/Add.1, para. 73). During the period immediately following apprehension, children are at particularly high risk of physical, verbal and psychological violence, such as verbal abuse, threats and beatings, and they are too often not provided with information on their human rights and the allegations brought against them in a manner that they can understand. Following their arrest, children often do not have prompt and private access to legal assistance or notification of their parents or caregivers, which makes them even more vulnerable and subject to a higher risk of being subjected to torture or other ill-treatment. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2015 | ||
Children deprived of their liberty from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2015, para. 26 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | Where the deprivation of liberty of a child can be justified as necessary, limited and consistent with the best interests of the child, the child must be treated with humanity and respect for his or her inherent dignity and in a manner that takes into account the needs of persons of their age and maturity. The Convention on the Rights of the Child specifies that the right to be confined in an age-appropriate manner includes, in particular, the right to be separated from adults unless it is considered in the child's best interest not to do so, and the right to maintain contact with his or her family through correspondence and visits, save in exceptional circumstances. Article 40 (1) of the Convention emphasizes this principle with regard to children in conflict with the law by adding the desirability of promoting the child's reintegration and assumption of a constructive role in society. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2015 | ||
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 58 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | Following from the State's obligation to investigate torture and other ill-treatment, the effective medical and legal investigation and documentation of torture and other ill-treatment are essential for the prevention of and accountability and redress for these crimes, as well as for the general operation of international law regarding torture. The Special Rapporteur finds that for every single right the victim has - from being free from torture in the first place to the rights after having survived torture, and even for the families of those torture victims who do not survive - documentation and evidence is the most fundamental prerequisite, and, unfortunately, one the attainments of which is too often frustrated. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2014 | ||
The death penalty and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 2012, para. 52 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | In relation to the enforcement of the death penalty, the Human Rights Committee has recommended that families of death row inmates be given reasonable advanced notice of the scheduled date and time of execution, with a view to reducing the psychological suffering caused by the lack of opportunity to prepare themselves for that event (CCPR/C/JPN/CO/5, para. 16). Similarly, in Staselovich v. Belarus, the Committee found that the failure of the authorities to notify the mother of the scheduled date for the execution of her son and their subsequent persistent failure to notify her of the location of her son's grave amounted to inhuman treatment of the mother. Secrecy and the refusal to hand over remains to families are especially cruel features of capital punishment, highlighting the need for total transparency and avoidance of harm to innocents in the whole process. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2012 | ||
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 53 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | Access to meaningful human contact within the prison and contact with the outside world are also essential to the psychological health of detainees held in solitary confinement, especially those held for prolonged periods of time. Within prisons this contact could be with health professionals, prison guards or other prisoners. Contact with the outside world could include visits, mail, and phone calls from legal counsel, family and friends, and access to reading material, television or radio. Article 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights grants prisoners the right to family and correspondence. Additionally, the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners provide for various external stimuli (articles 21 on exercise and sport; 37-39 on contact with the outside world; 40 on books; 41 and 42 on religion; 71-76 on work; 77 and 78 on education and recreation; and 79-81 on social relations and after-care). | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
|
| 2011 | ||
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 38 | Aug 19, 2019 | Paragraph | 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. | Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment | Special Procedures' report |
| 2011 |