Search Tips
sorted by
8 shown of 8 entities
Commissions of inquiry 2012, para. 51a
- Paragraph text
- [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;
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Families
- Year
- 2012
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
The death penalty and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 2012, para. 40
- Paragraph text
- 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.
- 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
- Families
- Year
- 2012
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
Impunity as a root cause of the prevalence of torture 2010, para. 75
- Paragraph text
- 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.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Families
- Persons on the move
- 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. 45
- Paragraph text
- 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.
- 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
- Families
- 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. 12
- Paragraph text
- 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.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Families
- Year
- 2016
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
The death penalty and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 2012, para. 61
- Paragraph text
- 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.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Person(s) affected
- Families
- Year
- 2012
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
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. 40
- Paragraph text
- 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.
- 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
- Children
- Families
- Year
- 2015
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
The death penalty and the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 2012, para. 52
- Paragraph text
- 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.
- 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
- Families
- Year
- 2012
- Date added
- Aug 19, 2019
Paragraph
8 shown of 8 entities