Search Tips
sorted by
30 shown of 164 entities
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 2
- Paragraph text
- In examining the relationship between the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and the international legal principles governing the use of force by State agents, and in developing concrete recommendations on the matter, the Special Rapporteur hopes to strengthen the capacity of States to ensure the effective prevention of and accountability for torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, including in extra-custodial settings. Moreover, as a complement to existing international standards governing the use of force, the present report is aimed at contributing to the development of seamless guidance on the entire spectrum of the use of force, from non-lethal to deliberately lethal and from custodial to extra -custodial, and therefore at supporting States in complying with their relevant huma n rights obligations. The report is also aimed at facilitating synergies, both at the national and the international levels, between mechanisms tasked with protection against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and those involved in overseeing and regulating the use of force more generally.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 3
- Paragraph text
- While the present report is focused on the extra-custodial use of force by State agents, its conclusions generally will also be relevant, mutatis mutandis, for non-physical forms of coercion and for ill-treatment committed by non-State actors. Owing to constraints of time and space, the Special Rapporteur intends to more systematically consider those issues in subsequent thematic reports. Moreover, in the present report the extra-custodial use of force under the law enforcement paradigm both in peacetime and in armed conflict is covered, but the use of force as a means of warfare under the hostilities paradigm is not examined. The terms “State agent” and “law enforcement official” will be used interchangeably to denote any person exercising, de jure or de facto, public authority on behalf of the State, whether of military or civilian status and whether appointed, elected, employed or contracted, including private security personnel. 2 Finally, the implications of the extra-custodial use of force are examined in the present report under human rights law only, and not under potentially applicable international humanitarian law.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 4
- Paragraph text
- Building on the work undertaken by his predecessors and other mandate holders and mechanisms, the Special Rapporteur conducted extensive research and broad stakeholder consultations with academic experts and representatives of governments, international organizations and civil society organizations, including through a multi-stakeholder expert meeting held in Geneva on 1 and 2 May 2017 and a general call for submissions in response to a thematic questionnaire posted on the website of the Office of the United Nations High Commissio ner for Human Rights from 29 May to 30 June 2017. 3 The present report reflects the resulting conclusions and recommendations of the Special Rapporteur.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, para. 5
- Paragraph text
- Apart from prohibiting the arbitrary deprivation of life and providing a few principles on the lawful use of lethal force, human rights treaties do not expressly regulate the extra-custodial use of force. 4 Instead, the contemporary legal principles governing the use of force by law enforcement officials (“use of force principles”) have been derived primarily from State practice and the application and interpretation of these very general treaty provisions in case law. The principles have been restated in two soft law instruments, namely, the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials and the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, and today can be regarded as general principles of law. 5 In particular, the use of force by State agents is governed by the following cumulative principles: • Legality: any use of force must have a legal basis and pursue a lawful purpose . 6 • Necessity: force must only be used when, and to the extent, strictly necessary for the achievement of a lawful purpose. 7 • Proportionality: the harm likely to be inflicted by the use of force must not be excessive compared to the benefit of the lawful purpose pursued. 8 • Precaution: law enforcement operations must be planned, prepared and conducted so as to minimize, to the greatest extent possible, the resort to force and, whenever it becomes unavoidable, to minimize the resulting harm.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Commissions of inquiry 2012, para. 19
- Paragraph text
- In the international human rights context, commissions of inquiry are independent investigative commissions created in response to human rights violations including, but not limited to, torture, genocide, extrajudicial killings, disappearances and incidents involving multiple or high-profile killings (A/HRC/8/3, para. 12). Most commissions of inquiry are established at the initiative of national Government authorities. International experts may be part of their composition. In the present report, commissions of inquiry are defined as national commissions of inquiry and truth commissions, as well as investigations undertaken by national human rights institutions. The quest for accountability and victims' rights are common denominators for commissions of inquiry and truth commissions. While a commission of inquiry is likely to be established at the height of violence, a truth commission may only be established once a conflict is over. Both national and international commissions of inquiry often result from concerted demands by civil society or the international community. International commissions of inquiry tend, however, to have comparatively briefer temporal mandates which seek to identify patterns of violations during a protracted period of armed conflict.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2012
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 52
- Paragraph text
- In Georgia, the Special Rapporteur received allegations that victims were encouraged by the prosecution to agree to plea-bargaining agreements without acknowledging their ill-treatment by the police.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 48
- Paragraph text
- While the lawfulness of specific weapons and other means of warfare has long been regulated in international humanitarian law, it has more recently also become an issue of consideration under human rights law with regard to the wider context of law enforcement. It is increasingly recognized that certain weapons and other means of law enforcement may be inherently cruel, inhuman or degrading by nature or design and, accordingly, that their use, production and trade would be incompatible with the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (General Assembly resolution 66/150, para. 24, and resolution 68/156, para. 30). Ever since the establishment of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur, mandate holders have expressed concern in this respect, starting in the very first report of the Special Rapporteur to the Commission on Human Rights, in 1986 (E/CN.4/1986/15, paras. 120-121), but most notably in a report prepared at the express request of the Commission in 2003 (E/CN.4/2003/69).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 60
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur welcomes recent initiatives by some States to establish and publish guidelines for their intelligence services and commitments they have made not to participate in, solicit, encourage or condone the use of torture or other ill-treatment for any purpose, to the extent that they accord with their international legal obligations. However, some aspects of published guidelines fall short of the standards required by the prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment. If a real risk of torture or ill-treatment is detected, a State must not proceed to work with a foreign agency. Any discretion afforded in the guidelines to executive actors to proceed to work with an agency, despite a real risk of the information they receive being tainted by torture or ill-treatment, is incompatible with the obligation of the State as to the prohibition of torture. In addition, no distinction between torture and other ill-treatment should be made. Likewise, the excuse of exceptional circumstances contained in some national guidelines is inconsistent with the prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
The scope and objective of the exclusionary rule in judicial proceedings and in relation to acts by executive actors 2014, para. 39
- Paragraph text
- There is a tendency to draw a clear distinction between the judicial and the executive use of tainted information by some domestic courts. The latter is often allowed, the argument being, inter alia, that it does not impinge upon the liberty of individuals or that, when it does, as relating to powers of arrest, it is usually of short duration. Alternatively, that argument may refer to the "ticking-bomb scenario", i.e., that the executive agencies cannot be expected to close their eyes to information at the cost of endangering the lives of the citizens of their own countries. In other words, courts tend to endorse the use of information acquired through torture or other ill-treatment by the executive agencies in all phases of operations, except in judicial proceedings. In fact, some courts have ruled that the executive agencies have no responsibility to examine the conditions under which information was obtained, or to change their decisions accordingly. They have also ruled that it is not for the courts to discipline the executive agencies, unless by way of a criminal prosecution, and that their jurisdiction only exists to preserve the integrity of the trial process.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 51
- Paragraph text
- During country visits, the Special Rapporteur observed that, in addition to the lack of competent forensic experts and health professionals, the legal profession often lacks capacity and knowledge to apply such evidence adequately. One reason for the low impact of forensic reports on torture is the gap between scientists and judicial authorities. Prosecutors and judges are often unable to evaluate adequately forensic evidence because of its complexity or often substitute their own reasoning for that of the expert's. This constitutes a major limitation to the effectiveness of forensic evidence and can only be eliminated through the training of judges and prosecutors on the effective forensic documentation of torture and other ill-treatment and on evidence that can be used in legal proceedings. Specifically, prosecutors and judges, as well as health professionals, must be trained on the Istanbul Protocol and other relevant materials. In addition, it is key to bring together authorities and civil society representatives with established forensic experts to promote forensic capacity-building and professional development.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Solitary confinement 2011, para. 24
- Paragraph text
- States around the world continue to use solitary confinement extensively (see A/63/175, para. 78). In some countries, the use of Super Maximum Security Prisons to impose solitary confinement as a normal, rather than an "exceptional", practice for inmates is considered problematic. In the United States, for example, it is estimated that between 20,000 and 25,000 individuals are being held in isolation. Another example is the extensive use of solitary confinement in relation to pretrial detention, which for many years has been an integral part of the Scandinavian prison practice. Some form of isolation from the general prison population is used almost everywhere as punishment for breaches of prison discipline. Many States now use solitary confinement more routinely and for longer durations. For example, in Brazil, Law 10792 of 2003, amending the existing "Law of Penal Execution", contemplates a "differentiated" disciplinary regime in an individual cell for up to 360 days, without prejudice to extensions of similar length for new offences and up to one sixth of the prison term. In 2010, the Province of Buenos Aires in Argentina instituted a Programme of Prevention of Violent Behaviour in its prisons which consists of isolation for a minimum of nine months (the initial three months in full isolation), a term that - according to prison monitors - is frequently extended.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2011
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 86
- Paragraph text
- The setting up of a national preventive mechanism requires a careful preparatory process that is to be "public, inclusive and transparent", including civil society and all other actors involved in the prevention of torture, as in Honduras and Paraguay. A transparent and inclusive preparatory process creates greater public attention for the future national preventive mechanism, ensuring its credibility, and may prevent problems after its designation. Many States seek assistance from various specialized institutions in the field of torture prevention and from the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and OHCHR for the process of setting up national preventive mechanisms. The Special Rapporteur has continuously offered his assistance in this regard and encourages States to further avail themselves of the mandate. As the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture has indicated, the development of a national preventive mechanism "should be considered an ongoing obligation, with reinforcement of formal aspects and working methods refined and improved incrementally". In that regard, the adoption, as in Costa Rica and Maldives, of clear and ambitious action plans defining the goals and strategies of the national preventive mechanism is useful.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 82
- Paragraph text
- Most fundamentally, States should provide their national preventive mechanism with a clear legal basis specifying its powers and ensuring its complete independence from the State authorities. Regrettably, some States fail to provide their national preventive mechanism with the necessary security and stability. This is the case, for example, in Mali, where no express guarantees or powers foreseen by the Optional Protocol are provided, or in Maldives and Mauritius, where the mandate of the national preventive mechanism is only based on a governmental decree. In order to provide the national preventive mechanism with the stability and authority needed for the execution of its difficult tasks, States parties should enact a specific national law establishing the mechanism, as in France and Luxembourg. That law must be in strict compliance with the Optional Protocol. This includes ensuring its complete functional independence and the complete independence of its staff, which implies that members of the national preventive mechanism must not be representatives of the Government, as is the case in Mali, and must maintain no close personal ties to the authorities to be inspected, as is the case in the Republic of Moldova.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2010
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 26
- Paragraph text
- While the distinction between torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment will always depend on the applicable treaty definition, the generic observations set out in the paragraphs below can be made.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 14
- Paragraph text
- In practice, the required standard of precaution does not impose an unrealistic burden but always relates to what is reasonably possible in the circumstances.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 3
- Paragraph text
- While the present report is focused on the extra-custodial use of force by State agents, its conclusions generally will also be relevant, mutatis mutandis, for non-physical forms of coercion and for ill-treatment committed by non-State actors. Owing to constraints of time and space, the Special Rapporteur intends to more systematically consider those issues in subsequent thematic reports. Moreover, in the present report the extra-custodial use of force under the law enforcement paradigm both in peacetime and in armed conflict is covered, but the use of force as a means of warfare under the hostilities paradigm is not examined. The terms “State agent” and “law enforcement official” will be used interchangeably to denote any person exercising, de jure or de facto, public authority on behalf of the State, whether of military or civilian status and whether appointed, elected, employed or contracted, including private security personnel. Finally, the implications of the extra-custodial use of force are examined in the present report under human rights law only, and not under potentially applicable international humanitarian law.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Extra-custodial use of force and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2017, para. 2
- Paragraph text
- In examining the relationship between the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and the international legal principles governing the use of force by State agents, and in developing concrete recommendations on the matter, the Special Rapporteur hopes to strengthen the capacity of States to ensure the effective prevention of and accountability for torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, including in extra-custodial settings. Moreover, as a complement to existing international standards governing the use of force, the present report is aimed at contributing to the development of seamless guidance on the entire spectrum of the use of force, from non-lethal to deliberately lethal and from custodial to extra-custodial, and therefore at supporting States in complying with their relevant human rights obligations. The report is also aimed at facilitating synergies, both at the national and the international levels, between mechanisms tasked with protection against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and those involved in overseeing and regulating the use of force more generally.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 29
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur intends to take the work of his predecessor a step further and commits to contribute actively, in consultation and cooperation with other stakeholders, to the development of universal guidelines on investigative interviewing.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 28
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur proposed that the first step in the development of universal guidelines on investigative interviewing would be to hold a broad public consultation. In parallel, OHCHR was tasked by the Human Rights Council, in its resolution 31/31, to organize an intersessional seminar to exchange national experiences and best practices on the implementation of effective safeguards to prevent torture and other ill-treatment during police custody.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Working methods, thematic priorities and vision for a meaningful anti-torture advocacy 2017, para. 20
- Paragraph text
- While the legal framework around torture is uniquely developed, the Special Rapporteur is of the view that certain terms relating to the prohibition of torture that are relied upon require reaffirmation and clarification. For example, while the Convention expressly defines torture in its article 1 (1), no such definition exists of "other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" as a whole, or of its separate elements. A former Special Rapporteur has argued that "the distinguishing factor is not the intensity of the suffering inflicted, but rather the purpose of the conduct, the intention of the perpetrator and the powerlessness of the victim" (see A/HRC/13/39, para. 60). Thus, based on the work undertaken by his predecessors, the Special Rapporteur will aim to further illuminate and interpret the exact parameters and obligations surrounding the absolute prohibition of torture. With a view to contributing to the doctrine on the prohibition of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the Special Rapporteur will also endeavour to further clarify the criteria and thresholds rendering a particular treatment or punishment "cruel", "inhuman" or "degrading". In doing so, the Special Rapporteur will aim to ensure that the protection space offered to victims of torture and other ill-treatment remains adequate in the light of the fast-evolving challenges marking the contemporary international environment.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2017
- Date 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. 56
- Paragraph text
- The questioning of persons is a specialist task that requires specific training in order to be performed successfully and in accordance with the highest standards of professionalism. The protocol must insist on the importance of adequate and regular training for law enforcement and other personnel involved in the questioning of persons (see A/HRC/4/33/Add.3 and CAT/C/USA/CO/2).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
- Date 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. 35
- Paragraph text
- The protocol must provide detailed guidance on the purpose and parameters of a human rights-compliant interviewing model that promotes a human rights-based approach, enhances the professionalism and effectiveness of law enforcement and other State agents and is premised on the aim of ensuring that all interviews are conducted without resort to torture, ill-treatment or coercion.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2016
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment from an extraterritorial perspective 2015, para. 47
- Paragraph text
- Article 5 (2) establishes the obligation to bring perpetrators to justice (to investigate, prosecute and punish) under the universal jurisdiction principle, requiring that each State party must take the measures necessary to establish its jurisdiction over relevant offences in cases where the alleged offender is present in "any territory under its jurisdiction" and it does not extradite him or her. The clause "any territory under its jurisdiction" clearly refers to the alleged offender's presence in any territory under the State's jurisdiction at the time of prospective apprehension, as opposed to denoting the locus of the act of torture. The latter would be an implausible, textually unfounded interpretation and would defeat the Convention's object and purpose. As explained by Danelius, discussions during the drafting process: Centred round the concept of so-called universal jurisdiction [and] whether each State should undertake … to assume jurisdiction not only based on territory or the offender's nationality but also over acts of torture committed outside its territory by persons not being its nationals. The principle of universal jurisdiction - which had already been accepted in conventions against hijacking of aircraft and other terrorist acts - was eventually accepted and found its place in article 5(2).
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Violence
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2015
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment from an extraterritorial perspective 2015, para. 29
- Paragraph text
- The Convention's drafting history reveals a preoccupation with balancing the practicability of implementing its provisions rather than an intent to limit the ability to hold States responsible for extraterritorial acts of torture or ill-treatment or to dilute the strength of its applicability. From the original phrasing of the 1978 draft by Sweden, four provisions - articles 11, (5) (1) (a), 5 (2) and 7 (1) - were in fact broadened during drafting from initial reference to "territory" to "any territory under its jurisdiction", with the initial reference to territory alone being rejected as too restrictive. In article 2 (1), the addition of "territory" to the initial reference to "jurisdiction" was intended to avoid the Convention's applicability being triggered by the nationality principle alone. There is also support for the argument that the same formulation was adopted in articles 12, 13 and 16 to ensure textual consistency. That the drafting history reveals changes from references to both "jurisdiction" and "territory" alone to "any territory under its jurisdiction" can be understood to reflect practical concerns rather than a wish to limit the Convention's extraterritorial applicability. A literal reading of the Convention's jurisdictional clauses clearly contradicts its object and purpose and gives rise to impermissible loopholes in its protections.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2015
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 53
- Paragraph text
- Prosecutors and courts should not be limited to evaluating reports from officially accredited experts, irrespective of their institutional affiliation. Criminal procedure must ensure that reports of a non-government health professional may be accepted as evidence of torture or other ill-treatment in Court. In addition, non-State health experts should be encouraged to review State examinations and to conduct their own independent assessments; these assessments should be given the weight they deserve on their merits. Courts should neither rule out non-State experts nor award State expert testimony more weight based solely on their "official" status. Regarding required expertise, it must be determined on its merits. In that regard, independence and objectivity are a primary concern. The State will usually have more resources and be in a privileged position to examine victims. Those facts must be considered alongside the degree of independence and impartiality such experts enjoy, as well as the obstacles that non-State experts might face in gaining access to and procuring evidence. The presumption must be that the State has to account for its own action or inaction and its inability to protect the rights of persons in custody. It is the State's obligation to rebut allegations, and to show that it has conducted truly effective investigations.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Equality & Inclusion
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Health
- Person(s) affected
- All
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Role of forensic and medical sciences in the investigation prevention torture and other ill-treatment 2014, para. 44
- Paragraph text
- Forensic medicine requires a continuous effort to remain abreast of new developments through ongoing training, study and reflection to provide information about previously undocumented torture situations and their physical and psychological consequences, transmit knowledge of new means of diagnosis and their potential, generate reflection on experiences arising from interventions in the field, and divulge new standards and guidelines. In order to fulfil their obligation to investigate, prosecute and punish and ensure reparations for torture and other ill-treatment, there is a need for more forensic experts (including pathologists, physicians, psychiatrists, psychologists, anthropologists and archaeologists) trained to do Istanbul Protocol evaluations. Emphasis must be laid upon training of forensic professionals in the documentation of torture sequels. There are still few State and non-State forensic specialists in the world. The participation of other physicians in such training and on the examination of alleged torture victims could help tackle this problem. Teaching is thus a key factor. States must also ensure even distribution of clinicians throughout the country. Equally important is the training of judicial, prosecutorial and law enforcement professionals. Prevention and investigation of torture under the Istanbul Protocol must be part of their compulsory legal curriculum and offered as part of continuing professional development programmes.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2014
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Certain forms of abuses in health-care settings that may cross a threshold of mistreatment that is tantamount to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2013, para. 14
- Paragraph text
- Both the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights have stated that the definition of torture is subject to ongoing reassessment in light of present-day conditions and the changing values of democratic societies.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Review of the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners 2013, para. 26
- Paragraph text
- In the following sections, the Special Rapporteur examines the nine targeted areas (see General Assembly resolution 67/188, para. 6) and offers a set of procedural standards and safeguards from the perspective of the prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment that should, as a matter of law and policy, be applied, at a minimum, to all cases of deprivation of liberty.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2013
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Commissions of inquiry 2012, para. 28
- Paragraph text
- Although commissions of inquiry can vary in their origin and mandate, there are three characteristics that make them an effective and unique tool: they are generally ad hoc, autonomous and independent, as well as being victim-centred, therefore allowing greater and active participation of victims in the process of establishing facts and identifying the priority elements that comprise reparations.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2012
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Commissions of inquiry 2012, para. 26
- Paragraph text
- Indeed, the process of achieving accountability can be aided by the work of a commission of inquiry where the information and names collected by the commission are shared with prosecuting authorities. While evidence collected by a commission of inquiry is often inadmissible in a court of law owing to the lower standards of evidence used by commissions to encourage broad participation, such information may be used as background information and provide further evidentiary leads.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- N.A.
- Year
- 2012
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph