Preventing Torture: An Operational Guide For National Human Rights Institutions

Preventing Torture
An Operational Guide for

National Human Rights Institutions
Note
The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the
expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning
the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation
of its frontiers or boundaries.
HR/PUB/10/1
Preventing Torture: An Operational Guide for National Human Rights Institutions
© Copyright OHCHR, APT and APF May 2010
The OHCHR, APT and APF permit free reproduction of extracts from this publication provided that due
acknowledgement is given and a copy of the publication carrying the extract is sent to the following
address:
Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions

G.P.O. Box 5218
Sydney NSW 2001
Australia
Credits
Cover photographs: The memories of the wires by Mounir Zok (centre), man in detention (left) and
detention centre officials (bottom) by the APF / Michael Power.
Preventing Torture An Operational Guide for National Human Rights Institutions
Contents
Acknowledgements ii
Foreword iii
List of abbreviations iv
Introduction for users v
Introduction: The concept of torture prevention and its application 1
Part I Prohibition of torture: The legal background 11

Chapter 1: What is torture? 12
Chapter 2: International and regional instruments on torture and other
forms of ill-treatment 16
Part II Preventing torture: NHRIs in action 25

Section I Promoting an effective legal framework 27
Chapter 3: Promoting legal and procedural reforms 28
Section II Contributing to the implementation of the

legal framework 35
Chapter 4: Investigating allegations of torture 36
Chapter 5: Interviewing 43
Chapter 6: Training public officials 55
Section III Acting as a control mechanism 61

Chapter 7: Cooperating with international mechanisms 62
Chapter 8: Monitoring places of detention 82
Chapter 9: Promoting public awareness 93
Section IV Cross-cutting actions 97

Chapter 10: NHRIs and the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture 98
Chapter 11: Public inquiries 106
Summary 111
Readings available in the CD-Rom 114
i
Acknowledgements
Preventing Torture: An Operational Guide for National Human Rights Institutions is a joint publication of
the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), the Association for the
Prevention of Torture (APT) and the Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions (APF).
The Guide was written by Barbara Bernath. It adapts and builds on information included in the Torture
Prevention CD-Rom, produced as part of the APT-OHCHR Actors for Change Project (2005). The
OHCHR, APT and APF would like to thank Francesca Albanese, Citlalin Castañeda, Kieren Fitzpatrick,
Kate Fox, James Iliffe, Ahmed Motala, Suraina Pasha, Chris Sidoti, Safir Syed and Lisa Thompson for
their contributions.
ii
Foreword
This Guide is the outcome of cooperation between the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner
for Human Rights (OHCHR), the Association for the Prevention of Torture (APT) and the Asia Pacific Forum
of National Human Rights Institutions (APF). It builds on the results of and the experience accumulated
during previous joint training endeavours: namely, the APT-OHCHR Actors for Change Project (2005–
2007) and the APT-APF training programmes for national human rights institutions (NHRIs) in the Asia
Pacific region.
Since the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, the prohibition of torture has
been universally understood to mean that “no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment” (article 5). The prohibition of torture is also complemented by the
obligation to prevent torture, and both are internationally recognized in the United Nations Convention
against Torture and its Optional Protocol. The latter, moreover, assists States parties to meet this
obligation by setting up a system of regular visits to places of detention by independent international
and national bodies.
Indeed, the Optional Protocol provides NHRIs with a potentially powerful monitoring and implementation
role. The Secretary-General has also encouraged States parties to strengthen the mandate and capacity
of NHRIs to enable them to fulfil this role effectively.
As cornerstones of national systems for the promotion and protection of human rights, empowered,
credible and properly established NHRIs are well placed to actively engage and cooperate with national
actors in the prevention of torture. This Guide has been designed as a practical tool to support them
in their concrete activities to prevent torture. It presents a whole range of useful information, such as
good practices. This Guide is part of an integrated CD-Rom package, which also includes associated
audio-visual resources.
I hope that this publication will foster a greater understanding of how to prevent such horrendous
violations of human rights and human dignity, and increase the capacity and role of NHRIs in doing so.
Navanethem Pillay
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
iii
List of abbreviations
ACJ Advisory Council of Jurists of the Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights
Institutions
APF Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions
APT Association for the Prevention of Torture
ICC International Coordinating Committee of National Institutions for the Promotion

and Protection of Human Rights
NGO Non-governmental organization
NHRI National human rights institution
NPM National preventive mechanism under the Optional Protocol to the

Convention against Torture
OHCHR Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
UPR Universal periodic review
iv
Introduction for users

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), the Association for the
Prevention of Torture (APT) and the Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions (APF) are
pleased to present Preventing Torture: An Operational Guide for National Human Rights Institutions.
This Guide aims to support and strengthen the work of national human rights institutions (NHRIs) –
whether they are human rights commissions or ombudsman offices – in the prevention of torture,
especially NHRIs that are fully compliant with the Paris Principles.1
While NHRIs that do not fully comply with the Paris Principles can still play an important role in the
prevention of torture, fully compliant NHRIs are more able to engage in this preventive work with
legitimacy, credibility and, therefore, with greater effectiveness.2
Rationale
NHRIs are a vital part of strong national human rights protection systems and play a key role in linking
the international and domestic human rights systems. Their mandate means that they can engage with
all relevant actors at the national level, as well as interact with international mechanisms, in order to
contribute to the prevention of torture.
Although NHRIs have broad mandates which require them to protect and promote all human rights
for all persons, there are strong arguments for NHRIs to devote special attention to the prevention of
torture.
Torture is one of the most horrendous violations of a person’s human rights. It is an attack on the
very essence of a person’s dignity. However, while there is an absolute prohibition on torture under
international law, it continues to be widely practised in all parts of the world. Combating torture therefore
requires the active involvement of many actors, including NHRIs.
A focus on prevention can present both challenges and opportunities for NHRIs. Most NHRIs operate
predominantly as “reactive” bodies that respond to complaints brought to them by individuals or
organizations, rather than initiating investigations or other preventive actions. While moving from this
reactive focus can be challenging, it is important to note that NHRIs do have a mandate to undertake
preventive actions, such as promoting legal reform, running training programmes and raising public
awareness. Placing greater emphasis on torture prevention therefore offers NHRIs the opportunity to
strike a balance between the different aspects of their mandate and to engage in preventive actions in
a more strategic way.
Monitoring places of detention is an area where NHRIs may experience the most difficulty in balancing
their traditional protective mandate with a preventive approach. This might be particularly challenging
for NHRIs that have been designated as the national preventive mechanism (NPM) under the Optional
Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment. The system of regular, unannounced, preventive visits established under the Optional
Protocol obviously differs significantly in its objectives, scope and methodology from investigative visits
carried out by NHRIs to document and respond to individual complaints. However, the Optional Protocol
includes certain guarantees and powers that can help resolve this challenge.
1 Principles relating to the status and functioning of national institutions for protection and promotion of human rights (General
Assembly resolution 48/134 of 20 December 1993).
2 Today there are more than 100 NHRIs worldwide; 65 of which are accredited as being in compliance with the Paris Principles.
Compliance is assessed through a thorough an accreditation process carried out by the International Coordinating Committee
of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights (ICC), under the auspices of OHCHR. NHRIs that are
deemed to comply with the Paris Principles are accredited with “A status” and enjoy special standing at the international level, in
recognition of their legitimacy and effectiveness.
Introduction for users | v

The Nairobi Declaration, adopted during the Ninth International Conference of National Institutions
for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights in October 2008, addresses the role of NHRIs in
the administration of justice and encourages their involvement in torture prevention. Indeed, several
provisions of the Nairobi Declaration are directly relevant for torture prevention, such as providing training
for law enforcement and correctional staff; conducting unannounced visits to police stations and places
of detention; reviewing standards and procedures; and promoting ratification of the Convention against
Torture and its Optional Protocol. The annual review of the implementation of Nairobi Declaration during
ICC meetings provides an additional motivation for NHRIs to be more actively involved in the prevention
of torture.
Background
The publication of this Manual is a direct follow-up to two significant activities. The first was the joint APT-
OHCHR Actors for Change project (2005–2007), which aimed to strengthen the capacity of NHRIs in
the field of conflict prevention and torture prevention. APT was the partner of OHCHR in all phases of the
project relating to torture prevention. The training course on torture prevention had three components: an
eight-week distance learning course, with learning materials provided on CD-Rom; regional workshops
that brought participants together for face-to-face discussion and practical training; and “Plans of Action
on Torture Prevention” drafted by participants for their respective NHRIs. Courses were held in all four
regions of the world, involving some 90 participants from 52 NHRIs.3
The second activity was consideration of a reference on torture by the APF Advisory Council of Jurists
in 2005, with expert support provided by APT. Since that time APF and APT have worked in partnership
to design and deliver national training programmes for NHRIs in the Asia Pacific region. The core
focus of the training is to build understanding of the United Nations Convention against Torture and its
Optional Protocol and to provide technical advice and training to APF member institutions and other key
stakeholders on implementation of the Convention against Torture and its Optional Protocol. A particular
focus of the training is to discuss the potential role of NHRIs as NPMs.4
Both training programmes have been evaluated as an “unqualified success”5 and APT, APF and OHCHR
jointly decided that the content of the two courses should be compiled, modified and made available to
NHRIs in a hard-copy manual and a companion CD-Rom.
Image: National Human Rights
Commission of Malaysia
3 15 NHRIs from Asia-Pacific (Afghanistan, Australia, Fiji, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Malaysia, Maldives, Mongolia,
New Zealand, Palestine, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Sri Lanka and Thailand), 14 NHRIs from Europe (Bulgaria, Denmark,
Finland, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Kosovo, Latvia, Northern Ireland, Poland, Portugal, Spain and the former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia), 13 NHRIs from French-speaking countries (Burkina Faso, Canada (Québec), Cameroon, Democratic
Republic of the Congo, Haiti, Mali, Morocco, Mauritius, Niger, Rwanda, Senegal and Togo) and 10 NHRIs from Latin America
(Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay and Peru).
4 APF-APT joint projects have included representatives from the NHRIs of Indonesia, Maldives, Nepal, Philippines, Thailand and
Timor-Leste.
5 Evaluation of the Strengthening of National Human Rights Institutions (OHCHR) project, Executive Summary (March 2008).
vi | Introduction for users

Objectives and content

The Guide is designed to be a practical toolkit to support NHRIs as they plan and undertake concrete
activities to prevent torture in their country. The guide begins by explaining the concept of torture prevention
and highlights the importance of engaging in a global, integrated strategy to prevent torture.
The Guide is divided into two key parts. The first section provides the legal context for the prevention
of torture, including the definition of torture and the relevant international and regional instruments that
prohibit torture. The second section outlines the practical steps that NHRIs can undertake to prevent
torture. Examples of good practices from different NHRIs have been included to illustrate effective ways
of putting torture prevention strategies into action. Each chapter includes key questions, the legal basis
for the involvement of NHRIs, discussion of the major issues and options for further reading.
The companion CD-Rom contains a range of useful documents and resource materials. It also features
interviews with representatives from NHRIs describing their work to prevent torture, as well as interviews
with leading international experts. The resource also includes short training spots on beginning a visit to
a place of detention and interviewing a person deprived of their liberty.
Introduction for users | vii

Introduction:
The concept of torture prevention
and its application
Key questions
• Do States have an obligation to prevent torture?
• How is the prevention of torture defined?
• What are the key elements of an effective torture prevention strategy?
• How can NHRIs contribute to the prevention of torture?
1. Introduction: A duty to prevent

“No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment” states
article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly
in 1948.
The prohibition of torture and other forms of ill-treatment has a special status in the international protection
of human rights. It is included in a number of international and regional treaties and also forms part of
customary international law, binding all States.
The prohibition of torture is absolute and can never be justified in any circumstance. This prohibition
is non-derogable, which means that a State is not permitted to temporarily limit the prohibition on
torture under any circumstance whatsoever, whether a state of war, internal political instability or any
other public emergency. Further, the prohibition of torture is also recognized as a peremptory norm of
international law, or jus cogens. In other words, it overrides any inconsistent provision in another treaty
or customary law.
Considering the particular importance placed on the prohibition of torture, the traditional obligations
of States to respect, to protect and to fulfil human rights is complemented by a further obligation
to prevent torture and other forms of ill-treatment.6 States are required to take positive measures
to prevent its occurrence.7 “In the case of torture, the requirement that States expeditiously institute
national implementing measures is an integral part of the international obligation to prohibit this
practice.”8
6 In its general comment No.31: The nature of the general legal obligation imposed on States Parties to the Covenant, the Human
Rights Committee stated that “[a]rticle 2 requires that States Parties adopt legislative, judicial, administrative, educative and other
appropriate measures in order to fulfil their legal obligations” (para. 7). It further added that “[i]n general, the purposes of the
Covenant would be defeated without an obligation integral to article 2 to take measures to prevent a recurrence of a violation of
the Covenant” (para. 17).
7 In the case of Velasquez Rodriguez, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights recognized that as a consequence of this
obligation, “the States must prevent, investigate and punish any violation of the rights recognized by the Convention” (para. 166);
Velasquez Rodriguez case (29 July 1988); Inter-Am.Ct.H.R. (Ser.C.) No. 4 (1988). In its general comment No.20, the Human
Rights Committee “notes that it is not sufficient for the implementation of article 7 to prohibit such treatment or pubnishment or
to make it a crime. States Parties should inform the Committee of the legislative, administrative, judicial and other measures they
take to prevent and punish acts of torture (…)” (para. 8).
8 International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia; Prosecutor v. Furundzija (10 December 1998); Case No. IT-95-17/I-T
(para. 149).
Introduction: The concept of torture prevention and its application | 1

The United Nations Convention against Torture also places an explicit obligation on States parties to
prevent torture and other forms of ill-treatment. According to article 2.1, “[e]ach State Party shall take
effective legislative, administrative, judicial and other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory
under its jurisdiction”, while article 16 requires that “[e]ach State Party shall undertake to prevent (…)
other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” Its Optional Protocol sets out a
mechanism to assist States parties to meet these obligations by establishing a system of regular visits
to places of detention by independent international and national bodies.
Although States have a duty to prevent torture, it is often not applied in practice and there is commonly
a lack of understanding about the concept of torture prevention. This introduction defines torture
prevention, outlines an integrated strategy to prevent torture and describes the preventive role that
NHRIs can play.
2. What does “Torture prevention” mean?

2.1. Defining “prevention of torture”
According to the Chambers Dictionary, “to prevent” means “to stop (someone from doing something, or
something from happening), to hinder, to stop the occurrence of, to make impossible, to avert.”
In public health, prevention is a common strategy in the fight against diseases, aimed at avoiding the
emergence, development and spread of epidemics.
Crime prevention “comprises strategies and measures that seek to reduce the risk of crimes occurring,
and their potential harmful effects on individuals and society by intervening to influence their multiple
causes.”9
Image: International Committee of the Red Cross / Fred Clarke
9 United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Crime, Economic and Social Council resolution 2002/13, para. 3. The paragraph
continues: “The enforcement of laws, sentences and corrections, while also performing preventive functions, falls outside the
scope of the Guidelines.”
2 | Introduction: The concept of torture prevention and its application

These definitions, while instructive, are insufficient to properly define the concept of prevention in relation
to torture and other forms of ill-treatment.
At a time where many interventions in the fight against torture are described as “prevention”, it is
important to distinguish between two different forms of torture prevention. This distinction is based on
when the intervention occurs and the approach that is employed.
Direct prevention (mitigation) aims to prevent torture from occurring by reducing the risk factors
and eliminating possible causes. This intervention happens before torture takes place and aims to
address the root causes that can lead to torture and ill-treatment, through training, education and
regular monitoring of places of detention. Direct prevention is forward-looking and, over the long term,
aims to create an environment where torture is not likely to occur.10
Indirect prevention (deterrence) takes place once cases of torture or ill-treatment have already occurred
and is focused on avoiding the repetition of such acts. Through investigation and documentation of
past cases, denunciation, litigation, prosecution and sanction of the perpetrators, as well as reparation
for victims, indirect prevention aims to convince potential torturers that the “costs” of torturing are
greater than any possible “benefits”.
It is important to bear this distinction in mind as these two approaches employ very distinct strategies
and methodologies. They are, however, complementary and both should form part of an integrated
programme to prevent torture.
2.2. Analysing the risk factors

In order to effectively address the root causes of torture and other forms of ill-treatment, a direct
preventive strategy should begin with a thorough analysis of risk factors (those conditions that increase
the possibility of torture occurring).
The general political environment is an important factor to consider, as a lack of political will to prohibit
torture, a lack of openness of governance, a lack of respect for the rule of law and high levels of
corruption can all increase the risk of torture. The same is true for the social and cultural environment.
Where there is a culture of violence, or high public support to “get tough” on crime, the risk of torture
occurring is also increased.
The national legal framework should also be analysed. In countries where torture is prohibited in the
Constitution and in law, as well as being a specific offence under the criminal code, the risk of torture
might be lower than in countries where this is not the case. The analysis should also focus on the rules
and regulations that apply to places where persons are deprived of their liberty, as well as the existence
of appropriate legal safeguards. In addition, the way in which the legal framework is implemented in
practice should be closely analysed.
The organization and functioning of the criminal justice system is another important factor to consider.
The level of independence of the judiciary, as well as the level of reliance on confessions in the criminal
justice system, will have a direct influence on the risk of torture. As the risk of torture is higher during
the initial period of detention, particular attention should be paid to law enforcement authorities. In
this regard, the institutional culture, the role and functioning of the police and recruitment and training
processes for officers can all positively or negatively influence the risk of torture.
Finally, the overall institutional environment should be included in the analysis. The level of accountability
and transparency of the authorities, the existence of public policies regarding crime prevention and the
effectiveness of complaints mechanisms are factors that can reduce the risk of torture, along with
effective independent external actors, such as NHRIs and civil society organizations.
10 In the medical field, this is called “primary prevention” (i.e. all the measures taken to reduce the risk of occurrence of a disease).

Situations of risk
Any situation where a person is deprived of his or her liberty and when there is an imbalance of power,
in which one person is totally dependent on another, constitutes a situation of risk.11
The risk of being tortured or ill-treated is higher at certain times during the period of a person’s detention,
such as the initial period of arrest and police custody, as well as during transfer from one place of
detention to another. Situations where persons deprived of their liberty are held out of contact with
others can also increase the risk of torture or ill-treatment, in particular incommunicado detention or
solitary confinement.
The risk of torture and other forms of ill-treatment exists within any closed facility; not only prisons
and police stations but also, for example, psychiatric facilities, juvenile detention centres, immigration
detention centres and transit zones in international ports.
Potential victims
It can be difficult to identify persons or groups who are at greater risk of torture and ill-treatment, as this
can vary significantly according to the national context. In fact, any person could potentially be at risk. In
general, however, vulnerable and disadvantaged groups within society – such as minority groups (racial,
ethnic, religious or linguistic), women, minors, migrants, people with disabilities, the homeless and the
poor – commonly face a higher risk of torture and ill-treatment.
An effective preventive strategy requires a certain level of political will to combat torture, which is publicly
stated and able to be monitored. In an environment where torture is systematically used to silence
political opposition, prevention initiatives are likely to fail or be used for political propaganda.
It is important to stress that no State is immune from the risk of torture and ill-treatment. As a result,
there is always a need to be vigilant and to develop and implement effective preventive strategies.
3. The three components of an integrated preventive

strategy
The development of a comprehensive strategy for torture prevention requires an integrated approach,
composed of three interrelated elements:
• a legal framework that prohibits torture

• effective implementation of this legal framework
• mechanisms to monitor the legal framework and its implementation.
The fight against torture has, for a long time, focused on the first two elements of this strategy, in
particular the enactment of laws and litigation of cases. An effective legal framework is an essential
part of any programme to combat torture. However, the mere existence of laws and regulations is not
sufficient to prevent torture; they also need to be properly understood and rigorously applied.
A significant emphasis has also been placed on ending impunity (exemption from punishment for a
criminal act) through the use of national and international criminal law. This line of action is an important
indirect prevention strategy that must be complemented by other approaches to effectively address the
root causes of torture.
This is why an integrated torture prevention strategy requires a third element, which is focused on direct
prevention and employing non-confrontational and non-judicial control mechanisms. These mechanisms
11 See the concept of “powerlessness” developed by the Special Rapporteur on Torture (E/CN.4/2006/6, paras. 39 and 40). Article
10.1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights establishes a link between the rights to liberty and personal integrity
and states that “[a]ll persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the
human person.”

can include, for example, regular and unannounced monitoring of places of detention by independent
bodies and public education campaigns to build community awareness and support for the prevention
of torture and ill-treatment.
This integrated preventive strategy can be depicted in the form of a house, where the legal framework
forms the foundation, implementation of the framework creates the walls and the control mechanisms
provide the protective roof.
Control mechanisms
• Visits to places of detention
• International human rights bodies
• Public awareness campaigns
Implementation
• Procedural safeguards
• Training of public officials
• Fight against impunity
Legal framework
• Ratification of international treaties
• Prohibition and criminalization of torture
• Legal safeguards
Existence of a comprehensive legal framework

A strong legal framework to prohibit torture is a critical component of any torture prevention strategy.
The legal framework should reflect relevant international human rights standards and include specific
provisions to prohibit and prevent torture.
States can draw on the international legal framework by:
• ratifying relevant international human rights treaties

• integrating international human rights treaties into national law
• respecting soft law12 in relation to the prohibition of torture and deprivation of liberty.
12 “Soft law” is a term used to refer to documents which are not binding at international law (i.e. whose status is less than that of
a treaty concluded under the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties). Examples include resolutions of bodies such as
the General Assembly and Human Rights Council, as well as action plans, codes of practice, guidelines, rules or statements of
principles produced by international or regional expert meetings. Treaty bodies’ jurisprudence and concluding observations can
also be considered as soft law. Such instruments and recommendations have an undeniable moral force and provide practical
guidance to States in their conduct. Their value rests on their recognition and acceptance by a large number of States and,
even without binding effect, they may be seen as declaratory of broadly accepted goals and principles within the international
community.

At the domestic level, States should adopt explicit legislative provisions that:
• prohibit any act of torture and stipulate that no exceptional circumstance may be invoked to
justify torture (possibly at the Constitutional level)
• make acts of torture, wherever in the world they are committed, a specific offence under criminal
law
• include appropriate penalties to punish the crime of torture
• stipulate that an order from a superior may not be invoked to justify torture
• make inadmissible in legal proceedings evidence that is gathered through the use of torture.
In addition, the following legal safeguards for persons deprived of their liberty should be provided:
• the right to have family members or a third party informed of their whereabouts following their
arrest
• the right to have access to a lawyer and to have the lawyer present during interrogation
• the right to have access to a medical doctor, possibly of own choosing
• the right to remain silent
• the right to be brought before a magistrate or judge within a reasonable period of time
• the right to challenge the legality of their detention and treatment
• the right to be informed of these rights in language that is understandable to them.
Implementation of the legal framework

Effective implementation requires practical measures to be taken on a range of levels to ensure that
national laws regarding torture and ill-treatment are respected in practice.
Training and education

The different actors involved in implementing the legal framework, and in particular those within the
criminal justice system (such as law enforcement officials, judges and detaining authorities), will require
proper training – both initial and ongoing – regarding the normative framework and the development of
operational practices that respect these norms.
Procedural measures
Procedural safeguards should be put in place and operate as intended, in particular for persons deprived
of their liberty. This could include ensuring that all registers in places of detention are properly maintained
and that there is a regular review of police codes of conducts.
Investigation and punishment

Allegations of torture must be promptly, impartially and effectively investigated13, even in the absence of
a formal complaint, and “the investigation must seek both to determine the nature and circumstances of
the alleged acts and to establish the identity of any person who might be involved.”14
Any breach of the law must be appropriately sanctioned. When this does not occur, a culture of impunity
develops which can undermine both the force of the law and its implementation.
13 See the jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee, in particular Rodriguez v. Uruguay, Human Rights Committee,
Communication 322/1988, views adopted on 19 July 1994; and Vadivel Sathasivam and Ms Parathesi Saraswathi v. Sri Lanka,
Human Rights Committee, Communication 1436/2005, views adopted on 8 July 2008.
14 See Blanco Abad v. Spain, Committee against Torture, Communication 59/1996, views adopted on 14 May 1998. On the scope of
investigation, see M’Barek v. Tunisia, Committee against Torture, Communication 60/1996, views adopted on 10 November 1999.

Taking action to tackle impunity is even more important in relation to torture and ill-treatment, as it is
absolutely prohibited under all circumstances.
The following actions should be taken:
• strengthening the independence of the judiciary

• establishing effective and accessible complaints mechanisms
• ensuring access to free legal aid and legal assistance
• promptly and effectively investigating allegations of torture or ill-treatment
• ensuring those who breach the law are punished.
Reparation for victims

Victims of torture and ill-treatment should be provided with full and effective reparation, including
restitution, compensation, rehabilitation, satisfaction and a guarantee of non-repetition.15
Financial compensation should be provided for economically assessable damages. Satisfaction can
include a variety of measures, such as an official declaration to restore the dignity of the victim, a public
apology or a commemoration and tribute to victims.
Image: International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims
15 See the Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human
Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law (General Assembly resolution 60/147 of 16 December 2005).

Control mechanisms
In addition to an effective legal framework, there is also a need to establish control mechanisms, as
the risk of torture is present in all countries at all times. Control mechanisms can help identify areas of
potential risk and propose possible safeguards.
Internal administrative control mechanisms which are set up within an institution – such as police
inspection services or prison inspection services – help monitor the functioning of State institutions
and their respect for legislative norms and regulations. While very useful, internal control mechanisms
are, by themselves, insufficient for this preventive work as they lack independence and have a more
administrative monitoring function.
In addition to internal control mechanisms, it is essential to set up independent mechanisms to visit

places of detention. The mere fact that independent bodies can enter places of detention, at any
time, has a strong deterrent effect. The objective of these visits is not to document cases of torture
or denounce the situation or the authorities. Instead the aim is to analyse the overall functioning of
places of detention and provide constructive recommendations aimed at improving the treatment and
conditions of detained persons.
The international human rights system also provides an important control mechanism, with relevant
treaty bodies able to review and make recommendations regarding the State’s legal framework and its
implementation.
Finally, the media and civil society organizations can contribute to an effective system of checks and
balances to prevent and prohibit torture. Responsible media reporting, public education campaigns and
targeted awareness-raising initiatives can build greater knowledge and understanding of the issues,
influence public opinion and help change the attitudes of stakeholders and decision makers.
4. The relevance of torture prevention to NHRIs

NHRIs are usually ideally placed to contribute at each level of an integrated strategy to prevent torture
and ill-treatment in their country.
NHRIs can contribute to the development of an effective legal framework by:
• encouraging the State to ratify relevant international human rights treaties

• advocating legal reforms to make torture a criminal offence and to prevent its use by public
officials.
NHRIs can contribute to implementation of the legal framework by:
• reviewing detention procedures

• investigating allegations of torture
• contributing to training programmes for relevant public officials.
NHRIs can contribute to, and act as, control mechanisms by:
• cooperating with international bodies

• monitoring places of detention
• promoting public awareness.

Watch
Go to the Preventing Torture CD-Rom to watch more on the role of NHRIs to
prevent torture and ill-treatment of people in places of detention.
Click on ‘Feature materials’ and then select ‘Item 1 – NHRIs: Confronting the
challenge’.
Key points: Introduction

• States have an obligation to prevent torture.
• There is an important distinction between direct prevention (measures
taken before torture occurs to stop it from happening) and indirect
prevention (measures taken after torture has occurred to avoid its
repetition).
• Preventing torture requires an integrated strategy involving three key
elements: a strong legal framework, effective implementation of the legal
framework and control mechanisms to monitor and support the legal
framework and its implementation.
Further reading
In the CD-Rom
Committee against Torture, general comment No. 2, Implementation of
article 2 by States Parties
Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation
for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and
Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law; General Assembly
resolution 60/147 of 16 December 2005
12-Point Programme for the Prevention of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman
or Degrading Treatment or Punishment by Agents of the State; Amnesty International;
2005 (revised)
Preventing Torture in the 21st Century; Essex Human Rights Review (Vol. 6, No. 1);
Human Rights Centre, University of Essex; 2009

Part I
Prohibition of torture:
The legal background
Chapter 1: What is torture?

Chapter 2: International and regional instruments
on torture and other forms of ill-treatment
11
Chapter 1:
What is torture?
Key questions
• What is the definition of torture?
• Can torture be justified in exceptional cases?
• Is cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment also prohibited?
1. definition of torture
It is important to stress at the outset that the legal definition of torture differs quite significantly from the
way the term is commonly used in the media or in general conversation, which often emphasizes the
intensity of pain and suffering inflicted.
Article 1 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment provides the internationally agreed legal definition of torture:
Torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally
inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or
a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of
having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on
discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with
the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It
does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.
This definition contains three cumulative elements:
• the intentional infliction of severe mental or physical suffering

• by a public official, who is directly or indirectly involved
• for a specific purpose.
In some cases, a broader definition of torture, covering a wider range of situations, may apply under
another international, regional or national law. When a broader definition applies, the Convention’s
definition cannot be used to narrow it. Its articles 1.2 and 16.2 specifically provide that its provisions
are without prejudice to provisions contained in any other international instrument or national law which
prohibits cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. For instance, the definition of torture in
the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture goes further by not requiring the pain or
suffering to be “severe”; by referring to “any other purpose” rather than just “such purpose as”; and by
including the reference to methods “intended to obliterate the personality of the victim or diminish his
physical or mental capacities”, irrespective of whether such methods cause pain or suffering.
It is important to note that many international torture prevention mechanisms stress the importance of
a gender-sensitive interpretation of torture and the need to pay particular attention to questions such
as rape in detention, violence against pregnant women and denial of reproductive rights, which have
long been recognized as falling under the Convention’s definition. It is also worth noting that “with the
consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity” has been
12 | Chapter 1: What is torture?

Part I Prohibition of torture: The legal background
interpreted16 to mean that privately inflicted harm against women, children or groups may be covered
under the definition if severe pain or suffering is caused and if the State fails to act with due diligence to
prevent or protect individuals, since it would be committed for a discriminatory purpose.
Lawful sanctions
The definition of torture provided in the Convention explicitly excludes “pain or suffering arising only
from, inherent or incidental to lawful sanctions.” The lawfulness of the sanction should be determined by
reference to both national and international standards, including the United Nations Standard Minimum
Rules for the Treatment of Detainees (which was specifically referred to in the 1975 United Nations
Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture). This approach recognizes
both the absolute nature of the prohibition of torture and the need for consistency in its application.
The issue of corporal punishment has been raised by some States under the so-called “lawful sanctions”
clause. However, this clause cannot be used to justify the use of corporal punishments under domestic
law. It has been firmly established that corporal punishments are prohibited under international law, in
general, and the Convention against Torture in particular.
2. Absolute prohibition of torture

Some human rights can be restricted under certain circumstances (for example, for the protection
of public order) if the restriction is provided for by law, is for a public interest, is necessary to protect
the rights of others or the community, and is proportionate. The circumstances under which these
restrictions may apply are specifically and exhaustively listed in various human rights treaties.
Some treaties also provide a special ability to derogate from certain human rights during an officially
declared public emergency. Derogate means to pass laws or take actions that would ordinarily violate
those rights.
Torture, however, is absolutely prohibited and can never be justified under any circumstances whatsoever.
Relevant international treaties unanimously exclude the freedom from torture and ill-treatment from
derogation and restriction clauses.
Customary international law, which applies to all States, including those that have not ratified relevant
human rights or international humanitarian law treaties, considers the prohibition of torture to be a
peremptory norm, or jus cogens. This means that no exception or derogation to the prohibition is
permitted in any circumstance, even a state of war, the threat of war, internal political instability or public
emergency. Necessity, self-defence and other defences are not accepted in any case of torture, no
matter how extreme or grave the circumstances.
In addition to the legal arguments, there are also solid moral and ethical grounds for rejecting any act
of torture.
Defusing attempts to justify torture

The absolute prohibition of torture is sometimes questioned by people on the grounds of security or
counter-terrorism, often using a hypothetical “ticking bomb” scenario. This scenario involves the police
capturing a terrorist whom they suspect has placed a bomb that is about to explode in the middle of a
large city. The police believe that only torture will make the suspect disclose the information needed to
prevent the deaths of thousands of people. The question is posed: “May the person be tortured?”
This hypothetical situation operates by manipulating the emotional reactions of the audience and
assumes that:
16 See Committee against Torture’s general comment No. 2 (para.18).
Chapter 1: What is torture? | 13

• there is a known threat

• the attack is imminent
• the attack will kill a large number of people
• the person in custody is the perpetrator of the attack
• the person has information that will prevent the attack
• only torturing the person will provide the information in time to prevent the attack.
In real life situations, however, one or more of these assumptions is always invalid. On the last point,
for example, the scenario assumes that the suspect will provide valuable information under torture. In
reality, torture is inherently unreliable for obtaining accurate information. Professional interrogators have
repeatedly emphasized the point that interrogation can be conducted much more effectively without the
use of torture.
The assumptions that underpin the “ticking bomb” argument can also, by extension, be used to try
and justify torture in a wider range of situations. For instance, we might ask ourselves if our reaction to
the “ticking bomb” scenario would be different if we were not sure whether the suspect was actually
connected with the bomb plot, or whether s/he was in fact connected to terrorism at all; whether the
suspect had any reliable information about the threat; if the threat was several days or a week away; or
whether the threat was even real.
The scenario also contains some hidden assumptions that should be defused.
• The motive of the torturer is to get the necessary information, with the genuine intention of saving
lives.
However, even if the torturer did begin with the genuine motive of obtaining information, torture
corrupts the perpetrator. This is an inherent part of the act of torture. Further, the assumption that
the objective is purely to gather information is too simplistic. In real life situations other motivations
and emotions, such as anger, punishment and the exercise of power, can take over.
• It is an isolated situation, not to be repeated regularly.
However, it is part of the nature of torture that any authorization of such acts invariably leads to a
slippery slope, where the use of torture becomes more widespread within the institution.17
3. Other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment

As outlined previously, for an act to be deemed torture under the Convention against Torture, it should
include three cumulative elements:
• the intentional infliction of severe mental or physical suffering

• by a public official, who is directly or indirectly involved
This definition raises the question of how to classify and respond to acts that fall short of satisfying all
three criteria. For instance, what about an act that is not inflicted “intentionally” but occurs because of
negligence? What about an act that does not occur for a specific purpose? What about an act that
inflicts pain or suffering not considered “severe”?
In these situations the prohibition of other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
may apply. As with torture, this prohibition is also absolute and non-derogable.
17 Defusing the Ticking Bomb Scenario: Why we must say NO to torture, always; Association for the Prevention of Torture; 2007;
pp. 13–16.
14 | Chapter 1: What is torture?

Article 16.1 of the Convention against Torture requires that “each State Party shall undertake to prevent
(…) other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment which do not amount to torture
as defined in article 1, when such acts are committed by or at the instigation of or with the consent or
acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.”
Therefore, any act that falls short of the definition of torture because it lacks one or more of the criteria
may still be covered under the prohibition outlined in article 16 of the Convention against Torture.18
Governments and officials sometimes assume that, because these forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment do not come within the definition of torture, there is some leeway in whether
they may be permitted in extreme circumstances. Such assumptions are completely wrong.
Under international law, there is no leeway regarding the prohibition of all forms of cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment. International law prohibits all such treatment, in all circumstances.
This is true under international human rights law and international humanitarian law, which prohibits the
ill-treatment of persons deprived of their liberty everywhere and at all times.
Key points: Chapter 1

• Article 1 of the Convention against Torture defines torture using three
cumulative elements: the intentional infliction of severe mental or physical
pain; with the direct or indirect involvement of a public official; for a
specific purpose.
• Torture is prohibited under international law and can never be justified.
The prohibition on torture is absolute and non-derogable.
• Cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is also absolutely
prohibited and non-derogable.
Further reading
In the CD-Rom
Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 20: replaces general
comment 7 concerning prohibition of torture and cruel treatment or
punishment (art. 7); 10 March 1992
Combating Torture: A Manual for Action; Amnesty International; 2003
Torture in International Law: A Guide to Jurisprudence; Association for the
Prevention of Torture, Center for Justice and International Law; 2008
Defusing the Ticking Bomb Scenario: Why we must say NO to torture, always;
Association for the Prevention of Torture; 2007
18 See Kostadin Nikolov Keremedchiv v. Bulgaria, Committee against Torture, Communication 257/2004, views adopted on 11
November 2008.
Chapter 1: What is torture? | 15

Chapter 2:
International and regional instruments on
torture and other forms of ill-treatment
Key questions
• Is the absolute prohibition of torture enshrined in international treaties?
• Which provisions of the Convention against Torture contain concrete
preventive actions?
• What other international and regional treaties are relevant to the
prevention of torture? What ‘soft law’ standards apply?
1. Prohibition of torture and other forms of

ill-treatment in international treaties
There are a number of international and regional instruments that absolutely prohibit torture and ill-
treatment.
1.1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights

The unequivocal prohibition on torture is included in the founding document of the international human
rights system: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Its article 5 states: “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment
or punishment.” The Universal Declaration of Human Rights also says that people have the right to “an
effective remedy” if their rights are violated.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which sets out the basic human rights standards that apply
to all States, forms part of customary international law.19
1.2. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides that no person “shall be
subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”
In addition, article 10 states: “All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with
respect for the inherent dignity of the human person.”
The Covenant provides that anyone claiming that their rights have been violated shall have an effective
legal remedy. Further, no derogation is allowed regarding the right not to be subjected to torture and
other forms of ill-treatment.
19 One of the sources of international law applicable in the International Court of Justice, according to Article 38 (1)(b) of the Statute
of the Court, is “international custom, as evidence of a general practice accepted as law.” The formation of customary international
law requires consistent State practice and supporting opinio juris (i.e. a belief that the practice in question “is rendered obligatory
by the existence of a rule of law requiring it”; see North Sea Cases, ICJ Rep. (1969) 44, para.77).
16 | Chapter 2: International and regional instruments on torture and other forms of ill-treatment
The Covenant establishes the Human Rights Committee, which monitors the implementation of the
rights set out in the treaty. It does this by examining the reports of States parties, as well as individual
communications/complaints received under the treaty’s Optional Protocol. The jurisprudence, general
comments and concluding observations adopted by the Human Rights Committee provide important
interpretive guidance on the obligations and rights set out in the Covenant.
The Covenant is an international treaty that binds all States that have ratified it. The high number of
States parties to the Covenant (165 in April 2010) indicates the overwhelming acceptance of the human
rights standards that it contains.
1.3. United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,

Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
The United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment is the most comprehensive international treaty dealing with torture.
It contains a series of important provisions in relation to the absolute prohibition of torture and establishes
the Committee against Torture to monitor the implementation of treaty obligations by States parties.
The Committee examines the reports of States parties and individual complaints. The Committee’s
concluding observations and its views on individual communications provide an additional aid in
interpreting the Convention.
In April 2010, 146 States had ratified the Convention.
1.3.1. Definition of torture

Article 1 of the Convention provides a definition of torture that contains the following three key
elements:
• the intentional infliction of severe mental or physical pain or suffering

• with the direct or indirect involvement of a public official
This definition is considered to be limited in some respects. It confines torture to acts committed by, or
in some way involving, agents of the State. If non-State agents carry out torture, public officials must be
involved in some way for the State to be held responsible. Article 1 of the Convention against Torture
says the act must occur “at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or
other person acting in an official capacity.”20
The fact that specific acts of torture are not itemized in the Convention is, however, one of the strengths
of the treaty. A list could never fully itemize or describe every possible method of torture that may be
used now or in the future.
1.3.2. Obligation to take preventive measures

According to article 2 of the Convention, each State party has an obligation to take all necessary
measures to prevent acts of torture. This includes legislative, administrative and judicial measures, as
well as any other measures that may be appropriate.
This is a legally binding obligation and, when reporting to the Committee against Torture, States parties
are required to explain what steps they have taken to implement this obligation.
20 See Elmi v. Australia, Committee against Torture, Communication 120/1998 (views adopted on 14 May 1999), which relates to the
definition of “public official” under article 1 of the Convention. In exceptional circumstances where State authority is wholly lacking
(Somalia had no central Government at that time), acts by groups exercising quasi-judicial authority could fall within the definition
of article 1.
Chapter 2: International and regional instruments on torture and other forms of ill-treatment | 17
NHRIs can also refer to this obligation when planning and undertaking activities to prevent torture and
ill-treatment of persons deprived of their liberty.
1.3.3. No justification for torture – ever

Article 2.2 of the Convention states that “no exceptional circumstances whatsoever” can justify torture.
This includes war or the threat of war, political instability, combating terrorism or any other emergency.
Orders from a superior officer are also not a justification for torture. Law enforcement and detaining
officials should receive training that clearly highlights their obligation to refuse such orders.
1.3.4. Non-refoulement
Article 3 of the Convention sets out the principle of non-refoulement, which requires States to not expel,
return or extradite a person to another State if there are “substantial grounds” for believing that the
person would be in danger of being subjected to torture.
The principle of non-refoulement is an illustration of the absolute prohibition of torture and other forms of
ill-treatment. It has been undermined in recent years by the practice of some States to seek diplomatic
assurances when there are known risks that the person being returned may be subjected to torture or
ill-treatment. This practice has been used in the context of the so-called war on terror, with the sending
State seeking assurances from the receiving State that the individual in question will not be tortured
or subjected to other forms of ill-treatment. This practice is considered to violate the principle of non-
refoulement and is not permissible.
1.3.5. Specific crime of torture

Article 4 of the Convention requires each State party to ensure that torture is included as a specific crime
in their national criminal law.
Some States argue that this is unnecessary, as acts of torture would already be covered by existing
offences in their criminal codes.
Image: International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims
However, this provision is essential because:
• torture is not just a form of violent assault, it is an exercise of power over a victim that does not
correspond to any other criminal offence
• defining torture as a crime underlines the specific nature and gravity of the offence
• making torture a specific offence provides a clear warning to officials that the practice is punishable,
thereby providing an important deterrent
• it emphasizes the need for appropriate punishment, taking into account the gravity of the
offence
• enhances the ability of responsible officials to monitor the specific crime of torture.
The Committee against Torture requires that States parties use, as a minimum, the definition of torture
included in article 1 of the Convention.
1.3.6. Universal jurisdiction

The Convention obliges each State party to establish its jurisdiction over the crime of torture, irrespective
of whether the crime was committed outside its borders and regardless of the alleged perpetrator’s
nationality, country of residence or absence of any other relationship with the country (articles 5–9). If
the State is unable to prosecute the offence, it is required to extradite the alleged perpetrator to a State
which is able and willing to prosecute such a crime. This principle of universal jurisdiction constitutes one
of the most important aspects of the Convention.21
Where torture is part of a widespread or systematic attack, or takes place in an armed conflict, those
responsible for torture might also be tried by the International Criminal Court, as torture is regarded as a
crime against humanity and a war crime. However, many more States have ratified the Convention against
Torture, which covers all acts of torture and creates the obligation to exercise universal jurisdiction.
1.3.7. Training officials

Article 10 of the Convention requires States parties to take steps to ensure that all law enforcement
personnel, medical personnel, public officials and others involved in the deprivation of liberty receive
education and information on the prohibition and prevention of torture.
1.3.8. Review of detention procedures

Under article 11 of the Convention, States parties are required to keep under systematic review
interrogation rules, instructions, methods and practices, as well as custody procedures. These should
comply with the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners and the
United Nations Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or
Imprisonment.
1.3.9. Prompt investigation

According to article 12 of the Convention, each State party must establish prompt and impartial
investigations whenever there is reasonable ground to believe that an act of torture has been committed
in any territory under its jurisdiction. This means that, even in the absence of a formal complaint, the
relevant authorities must undertake an impartial, effective, independent and thorough investigation as
soon as they receive information indicating any instance of torture or ill-treatment.
21 See the decision of the Committee against Torture dealing with the trial of Hissène Habré in Senegal (Suleymane Guengueng and
others v. Senegal, Committee against Torture, Communication 181/2001, views adopted on 17 May 2006).
1.3.10. Right of victims to complain and obtain redress

The Convention provides that victims of torture have the right to complain and to have their case
investigated promptly and impartially (article 13), as well as to receive redress and adequate compensation
(article 14). This also includes the right to rehabilitation that is as full as possible.22
1.3.11. Inadmissible evidence

According to article 15 of the Convention, any evidence gathered as a result of torture must be deemed
inadmissible in legal proceedings. This provision is extremely important because, by making such
statements inadmissible in court proceedings, one of the primary aims of torture becomes redundant.
1.3.12. Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture

The Convention against Torture is complemented by an Optional Protocol, which was adopted in 2002
and entered into force in 2006. The Optional Protocol does not establish new normative standards.
Instead, it reinforces the specific obligations for prevention of torture in articles 2 and 16 of the Convention
by establishing a system of regular visits to places of detention by international and national bodies.
Watch
Go to the Preventing Torture CD-Rom to watch Victor Rodriguez Rescia,
Chair of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture, discussing the
definition of torture set out in the Convention against Torture.
Click on ‘Feature materials’ and then select ‘Item 2 – Defining torture’.
1.4. Other treaties

A number of other international human rights treaties contain similar prohibitions of torture and other
ill-treatment.
The Convention on the Rights of the Child contains a specific provision in relation to torture and ill-
treatment of children (article 37), as does the Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant
Workers and Members of Their Families (article 10) and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities (article 15).
Although there is no specific provision on torture included in the Convention on the Elimination of All
Forms of Discrimination against Women, the relevant United Nations treaty body has adopted a general
recommendation on violence against women that deals with torture (General Recommendation 19,
1992).
International refugee law also provides an important source of international human rights law that
is highly relevant to the issue of torture. The right to seek asylum in another country is one of the
fundamental protections for anyone who faces the danger of persecution. There is a total prohibition
on any Government returning a person to a country where they would be in danger of serious human
rights violations, and torture in particular. This is the principle of non-refoulement, which is specifically
mentioned in the Convention against Torture.
22 See jurisprudence on articles 13 and 14 (Hajrizi Dzemajl et al. v. Yugoslavia, Committee against Torture, Communication 161/2000,
views adopted on 21 November 2002; Jovica Dimitrov v. Serbia and Montenegro, Human Rights Committee, Communication
171/2000, views adopted on 3 May 2005; Danilo Dimitrijevic v. Serbia and Montenegro, Human Rights Committee, Communication
172/2000, views adopted on 16 November 2005; Dragan Dimitrijevic v. Serbia and Montenegro, Human Rights Committee,
Communication 207/2002, views adopted on 24 November 2004; Slobodan & Ljiljana Nikolić v. Serbia and Montenegro, Human
Rights Committee, Communication 174/2000, views adopted on 24 November 2005.
Although they are not strictly human rights treaties, the Geneva Conventions, which apply in times of
armed conflict, also contain a clear and unambiguous prohibition of torture in their common article 3.
The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court also explicitly lists torture as a crime against
humanity that falls under the jurisdiction of the Court. Article 7(2)(e) defines torture as “the intentional
infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, upon a person in custody or under the
control of the accused; except that torture shall not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in
or incidental to, lawful sanctions.” This definition is broader than that in the Convention against Torture,
as it includes acts committed by both State and non-State actors and does not require “purpose” as
an objective of the torture.
2. Prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment in

regional instruments
There are four general regional human rights treaties – in Europe, Africa, Arab countries and the Americas
– which each contain a clear and unequivocal prohibition of torture. There are also two regional treaties
– in Europe and the Americas – that deal specifically with torture.
2.1. European Convention on Human Rights

The European Convention on Human Rights, adopted in 1950, is a regional treaty under the auspices
of the Council of Europe. Article 3 states:
No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
The Council of Europe has also adopted a treaty dealing specifically with torture: the European Convention
for the Prevention of Torture (1987). This treaty does not create any new norms but does establish a
visiting Committee (see chapter 7 for more information).
2.2. Treaties under the Organization of American States

The American Convention on Human Rights, adopted in 1969, is a regional treaty under the auspices of
the Organization of American States. Article 5 states:
Every person has the right to have his physical, mental, and moral integrity respected. No one
shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment or treatment. All
persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with respect for the inherent dignity of the human
person.
The Organization of American States has also adopted a specific instrument on torture: the Inter-
American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture (1985). The Convention contains the following
detailed definition of torture (article 2):
For the purposes of this Convention, torture shall be understood to be any act intentionally
performed whereby physical or mental pain or suffering is inflicted on a person for purposes
of criminal investigation, as a means of intimidation, as personal punishment, as a preventive
measure, as a penalty, or for any other purpose. Torture shall also be understood to be the use
of methods upon a person intended to obliterate the personality of the victim or to diminish his
physical or mental capacities, even if they do not cause physical pain or mental anguish.
This definition goes further than the one contained in the Convention against Torture by not requiring the
pain or suffering to be “severe”; by referring to “any other purpose” rather than “such purpose as”; and
by including the reference to methods “intended to obliterate the personality of the victim or diminish his
physical or mental capacities”, irrespective of whether such methods cause pain or suffering.
The Convention also specifically states that any public official who carries out torture – or who orders
it or fails to prevent it – is guilty of a crime and that acting under orders is no defence to the crime.
The Convention provides for an absolute prohibition of torture that cannot be suspended under any
circumstances.
The Inter-American Convention further requires that:
• police and other public officials are trained to prevent torture

• allegations of torture are investigated and that criminal prosecutions will occur where
appropriate
• laws are passed to provide compensation for torture victims
• statements extracted under torture are not admissible as evidence in legal proceedings
• States prosecute or extradite alleged torturers.
The Convention also requires States parties to take effective measures to prevent and punish other
cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
While the Convention does not contain a separate enforcement mechanism, the Inter-American
Commission on Human Rights has an obligation to report on the practice of torture in Member States
and the Inter-American Court has taken on jurisdiction of this treaty.
2.3. African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights

The African Charter, adopted by the Organization of African Unity in 1981, states:
Every individual shall have the right to the respect of the dignity inherent in a human being and to
the recognition of his legal status. All forms of exploitation and degradation of man, particularly
slavery, slave trade, torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment and treatment shall be
prohibited.
2.4. Arab Charter on Human Rights

Article 8 of the Arab Charter on Human Rights, adopted by the League of Arab States on 22 May 2004
and entered into force 15 March 2008, provides that:
1. No one shall be subjected to physical or psychological torture or to cruel, degrading, humiliating

or inhuman treatment.
2. Each State party shall protect every individual subject to its jurisdiction from such practices
and shall take effective measures to prevent them. The commission of, or participation in, such
acts shall be regarded as crimes that are punishable by law and not subject to any statute of
limitations. Each State party shall guarantee in its legal system redress for any victim of torture
and the right to rehabilitation and compensation.
3. General standards
In addition to these various treaties, there are a number of general standards and professional principles
that are highly relevant to the prevention of torture.
These soft law standards cannot be legally enforced in the same way as treaty obligations. However,
they provide detailed and useful guidelines for interpreting terms such as “cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment”, as well as for implementing treaty obligations.
The Committee against Torture, for example, makes reference to the United Nations Standard Minimum
Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, when examining steps taken by States parties to implement article
11 of the Convention against Torture, which requires them to keep their detention procedures under
review.
3.1. United Nations standards

The United Nations has a developed a number of standards related to the prevention of torture,
including:
• Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners

• Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners
• Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or
Imprisonment
• Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty
• Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (The Beijing Rules)
• Principles of Medical Ethics relevant to the Role of Health Personnel, particularly Physicians, in
the Protection of Prisoners and Detainees against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment
• Model Autopsy Rules
• Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials
• Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials
• Principles on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman
or Degrading Treatment of Punishment (Istanbul Protocol).
3.2. Regional standards

Council of Europe
The Council of Europe has established a number of instruments related to the prevention of torture and,
in addition, a number of recommendations have been adopted by the Committee of Ministers.
The most relevant standards include:
• the European Prison Rules (revised in January 2006)

• the Declaration on the Police
• the European Code for Police Ethics
• standards developed by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture.
In 2001, the European Union also adopted Guidelines on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment.
Organization of American States

In March 2008, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights adopted a set of Principles and Best
Practices on the Protection of Persons Deprived of Liberty in the Americas.
African Union
The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights adopted Guidelines and Measures for the
Prohibition and Prevention of Torture, Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in Africa
(the Robben Island Guidelines).
It also adopted Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Assistance in Africa, which
include provisions on the prevention of torture.

• Torture is prohibited in a number of international human rights treaties.
• The Convention against Torture contains a series of provisions on
prevention measures.
• Regional instruments in Africa, the Americas, Arab countries and Europe
also prohibit torture.
• ‘Soft law’ standards, both international and regional, complement the
prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment.
Further reading
The United Nations Convention against Torture: A Commentary; Manfred
Nowak and Elizabeth McArthur; Oxford University Press; 2008
The UN Committee against Torture: An Assessment; Chris Inglese, Kluwer
Law International; 2001
In the CD-Rom
Committee against Torture, general comment No. 2, Implementation of article 2
by States Parties
The Torture Reporting Handbook; Camille Giffard, Human Rights Centre,
University of Essex; 2000
Bringing the International Prohibition of Torture Home: National
Implementation Guide for the UN Convention against Torture and Other
Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; The Redress Trust;
2006
Torture in International Law: A Guide to Jurisprudence; Association for the
Prevention of Torture and the Center for Justice and International Law; 2008
Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights: A Practitioner’s Handbook;
Ugur Erdal and Hasan Bakirci, World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) Handbook Series
Vol. 1; 2006
The Prohibition of Torture and Ill-Treatment in the Inter-American Human Rights System:
A Handbook for Victims and Their Advocates; Diego Rodríguez-Pinzón and Claudia Martin,
World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) Handbook Series Vol. 2; 2006
The Prohibition of Torture and Ill-Treatment in the African Human Rights System: A Handbook
for Victims and Their Advocates; Frans Viljoen and Chidi Odinkalu, World Organisation Against
Torture (OMCT) Handbook Series Vol. 3; 2006
Part II
Preventing torture:
NHRIs in action
Section I: Promoting an effective legal framework

Section II: Contributing to the implementation of the legal framework
Section III: Acting as a control mechanism
Section IV: Cross-cutting actions
25
Introduction to Part II
The primary responsibility to prevent torture rests with the State, which has a clear duty to take all
measures to prevent torture and other forms of ill-treatment.
NHRIs, which are a key element of strong national human rights protection system, can play a crucial
role by ensuring that the State upholds this obligation.
Part II describes in detail the practical actions that NHRIs can take under each of the three dimensions
of an integrated torture prevention strategy. In addition, a fourth section presents a selection of cross-
cutting actions for NHRIs to consider. Each chapter includes examples of good practices from NHRIs
in different parts of the world.
Section I: Promoting an effective legal framework

Chapter 3: Promoting legal and procedural reforms
Section II: Contributing to the implementation of the legal framework

Chapter 4: Investigating allegations of torture
Chapter 5: Interviewing
Chapter 6: Training public officials
Section III: Acting as a control mechanism

Chapter 7: Cooperating with international mechanisms
Chapter 8: Monitoring places of detention
Chapter 9: Promoting public awareness
Section IV: Cross-cutting actions

Chapter 10: NHRIs and the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture
Chapter 11: Public inquiries
26
Part II Preventing torture: NHRIs in action
Section I
Promoting an effective
legal framework
27
Chapter 3:
Promoting legal and procedural reforms
Key questions
• What type of legal reforms should NHRIs promote in relation to the
prevention of torture?
• What fundamental safeguards should NHRIs promote regarding
transparency of places of detention?
• What other detention procedures should NHRIs promote?
Legal basis for NHRI involvement

Paris Principles
Competence and responsibilities
3. A national institution shall, inter alia, have the following responsibilities:
(a) To submit to the Government, Parliament and any other competent
body, on an advisory basis either at the request of the authorities
concerned or through the exercise of it a power to hear a matter without any referral,
opinions, recommendations, proposals and reports on any matters concerning the
protection and promotion of human rights. The national institution may decide to
publicize them. These opinions, recommendations, proposals and reports as well as
any prerogative of the national institution, shall relate to the following area:
(i) Any legislative or administrative provisions, as well as provisions relating to the
judicial organization, intended to preserve and extend the protection of human
rights. In that connection, the national institution shall examine the legislation
and administrative provisions in force, as well as bills and proposals, and shall
make such recommendations as it deems appropriate in order to ensure that
these provisions confirm to the fundamental principles of human rights. It shall,
if necessary, recommend the adoption of new legislation, the amendment of
legislation in force and the adoption or amendment of administrative measures
(b) To promote and ensure the harmonization of national legislation, regulations and
practices with the international instruments to which the State is a party, and their
effective implementation
(c) To encourage ratification of the above-mentioned instruments or accession to those
instruments, and their effective implementation
ACJ Reference on Torture

Ratification of relevant international instruments
NHRIs should stress the importance of ratifying all relevant treaties regarding torture,
including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, its First Optional Protocol,
the Convention against Torture and the Optional Protocol. In particular, they should stress the
importance of individuals having a right to make a complaint to relevant international bodies
28 | Chapter 3: Promoting legal and procedural reforms

Part II Preventing torture: NHRIs in action | Section I Promoting an effective legal framework
and therefore the importance of their States becoming party to the First Optional Protocol to
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and making a declaration under article
22 of the Convention against Torture.
Legislative implementation of international obligations in domestic law

NHRIs should urge their State to:
• include a comprehensive definition of the term torture in domestic legislation
• ensure that torture is a specific criminal offence under domestic law
• recognize customary international law as informing domestic law
• give legislative effect to the non-refoulement principle, including the prohibition of the
return of person to a country in which they may face torture or other cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment
• enact legislation asserting jurisdiction over the extraterritorial acts of torture committed
by nationals and non nationals.
Interrogation standards
NHRIs should promote the Minimum Interrogation Standards (MIS) developed by the ACJ and
work to make sure that public officials involved in interrogations are fully informed with regard
to these MIS and trained to use them effectively.
Introduction
A country’s legal framework provides the foundation for any effective strategy to prevent torture. This
legal framework includes international treaties that the State has ratified, as well as domestic laws that
it has enacted.
NHRIs have an important role to play in promoting the ratification of relevant international human rights
treaties. They also have a strong advisory mandate that allows them to review existing legislation,
propose amendments or recommend new legislation to support the prevention of torture.
In addition, NHRIs can advocate for detention procedures that meet international norms and provide
effective safeguards.
1. Promoting ratification of international treaties

NHRIs should review whether their country has ratified all key international treaties related to torture,
and in particular:
• the Convention against Torture (including articles 21 and 22) and its Optional Protocol
• the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its Optional Protocol
Where appropriate, regional treaties should also be considered (see chapter 2 for more information).
If a State has not ratified these core treaties, NHRIs can develop and pursue a strategy to promote
ratification. This can include making a formal recommendation to the Government to ratify certain treaties,
actively lobbying governmental and parliamentary representatives and building public awareness on the
issue.
Chapter 3: Promoting legal and procedural reforms | 29

The National Human Rights Commission of Rwanda has actively lobbied its Government to
ratify the Convention against Torture. On 15 December 2008, Rwanda became the 146th State
party to the Convention.
2. Promoting legal reform

The Convention against Torture contains a number of important measures that contribute to the
prevention of torture. When a State ratifies the treaty it is obliged to implement these measures in its
domestic laws and policies.
NHRIs in these countries have an important role to play to assess whether the national legal framework
meets the requirements set out in the Convention against Torture. When this is not the case, NHRIs
should use their mandate to promote the necessary legal reforms.
In countries with a monist system – where international obligations directly form part of the national legal
framework – NHRIs should monitor the situation to assess whether these obligations are respected in
practice.
Criminalization of torture (article 4)

Article 1 of the Convention against Torture provides a clear definition of torture. This definition makes
torture distinct from other crimes such as assault, rape or murder, although there may be some overlap
with these crimes.
The three key elements of the definition of torture include:
• that severe pain or suffering – physical or psychological – is inflicted intentionally

• it is committed by agents of the State, or with its consent or acquiescence
• for a specific purpose, such as obtaining information, punishment or intimidation.
The Convention against Torture requires States parties to make torture a specific offence in their national
criminal law. The Committee against Torture recommends that States use, as a minimum, the definition
provided in the Convention.
If it does not already exist, NHRIs should advocate that a specific crime of torture is included in their
country’s criminal code, in accordance with article 1 of the Convention.
The Convention also requires States to ensure that the crime of torture is punishable with a penalty that
takes into account the extremely grave nature of the offence.
Inadmissibility of evidence obtained by torture (article 15)

The criminal law should clearly state that any evidence obtained under torture is inadmissible in criminal
proceedings brought against that person. NHRIs should ensure that this law is respected in practice.
Universal jurisdiction to trial torturers (articles 5–9)

NHRIs should ensure that legislation exists to enable the State to prosecute any alleged torturer in its
territory, irrespective of whether the crime was committed outside its borders and regardless of the
alleged perpetrator’s nationality, country of residence or absence of any other relationship with the
country. If the State is unable to prosecute the offence, it is required to extradite the person to a State
which is able and willing to prosecute such a crime.

Non-refoulement (article 3)
NHRIs should monitor whether domestic laws, as well as relevant policies and practices, are sufficient
to respect and uphold the principle of non-refoulement, which is a key obligation of States parties under
the Convention.
In his capacity as Acting Chairperson of the Law Reform and Development Commission, the
Ombudsman of Namibia has requested the Commission to make protection from torture a top
priority. A workshop was held in April 2009 to prepare a report and a draft bill on torture, which
the Ombudsman will submit to the Cabinet Committee on Legislation for tabling in Parliament.
The Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission was a member of the Committee
responsible for drafting the Law of Prisons and Detention Centers, which was adopted by the
Afghan Parliament in July 2007. The Commission currently serves as a member of the Prisons
High Council and successfully advocated for a civil society representative to also serve on the
Council.
3. Reforming detention procedures

Establishing a legal framework that includes the provisions outlined above is an essential component
in prohibiting and preventing acts of torture and other forms of ill-treatment. However, detailed and
concrete procedures are also required to ensure that the legal framework works effectively in practice. It
may even be appropriate to include some of the most important procedures in the law itself.
As torture nearly always takes place in secret, promoting greater transparency of places of detention is
a substantial step towards prevention because it removes many of the opportunities for torture to occur.
In addition, there are a number of other procedures that can provide important safeguards and help
reduce the risk of ill-treatment of persons deprived of their liberty.
NHRIs should actively promote and support the adoption of detention procedures that bring greater
transparency and provide practical safeguards.
3.1. Detention procedures contributing to transparency

The Committee against Torture, the Human Rights Committee and regional mechanisms recommend
the adoption of a number of procedural safeguards that aim to reduce the risk of torture and ill-treatment
in places of detention.23
No unauthorized places of detention

Persons deprived of liberty should not be held in unauthorized places of detention. Unauthorized places
of detention have no procedures or records and therefore provide no institutional protection to the
detainee. It should be a criminal offence to hold persons deprived of their liberty in unauthorized places
of detention.
No incommunicado detention
Incommunicado detention – which occurs when a person is isolated and has no contact with the outside
world – creates an environment that is conducive to torture, especially when the situation is prolonged.
All persons deprived of their liberty should be allowed to receive visits from a lawyer, family members
23 See the Committee against Torture’s general comment No. 2 on the implementation of article 2 by States Parties, in particular
paragraph 13, which states: “[c]ertain basic guarantees apply to all persons deprived of their liberty (…). Such guarantees include,
inter alia, maintaining an official register of detainees, the right of detainees to be informed of their rights, the right promptly to
receive independent legal assistance, independent medical assistance, and to contact relatives (…)”. See also the Human Rights
Committee’s general comment No. 20 concerning prohibition of torture and cruel treatment or punishment (article 7).

and others. Any exceptions should be clearly specified in law and should be of limited duration, with
oversight by the judiciary.24
Right to inform a third party

It is essential that persons who have been arrested are allowed to contact a family member, friend,
lawyer, consulate representative or any person of their choice and inform them of their arrest and where
they are being held.
Access to a lawyer
Ensuring that a person has access to a lawyer immediately following his or her arrest, especially during
interrogation, can significantly reduce the risk of torture. In addition, a lawyer will be able to provide
advice about the legality of their client’s detention and take action on any complaints that may be made.
Access to a lawyer should include the right to contact and be visited by a lawyer and, in principle, the
right to have the lawyer present during interrogation.
Access to a medical doctor

The right to receive a medical examination by an independent medical doctor – and, if possible, a
doctor of the person’s own choice – also helps reduce a culture of secrecy from developing in places
of detention. A medical examination can establish the physical condition of the person at the time of his
or her arrest or detention. This can be a significant deterrent against torture and can also help to detect
torture if it does occur. The medical examination can also establish if the person suffers from any health
problems that might be aggravated by detention.25 The results of the medical examination should be
formally recorded by the detaining authorities and also be made available to the person and his or her
lawyer.
Image: APF / Michael Power
24 In its general comment No. 20, the Human Rights Committee states that “[p]rovisions should also be made against incommunicado
detention” (para. 11). See also Polay Campos v. Peru, Human Rights Committee, Communication 577/1994, views adopted on
6 November 1997.
25 See Mr. C. v. Australia, Human Rights Committee, Communication 900/1999, views adopted on 28 October 2002; and Albert
Wilson v. Philippines, Human Rights Committee, Communication 868/1999, views adopted on 30 October 2003.

Appearing before a judge

Anyone who is arrested should be brought promptly before a judge. The judge should ensure that the
person’s arrest and detention are legal. The judge will also be able to investigate any complaint that the
person may raise. Even in the absence of a formal complaint, the judge should be able to take action ex
officio if there are visible injuries or other indications that torture or ill-treatment may have occurred.
3.2. Other detention procedures

The following detention procedures focus specifically on the deprivation of liberty by police officials. They
set out recommended best practices by international and regional mechanisms, such as the European
Committee for the Prevention of Torture.
In 2006, the Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions adopted detailed procedural
standards on interrogation – the Minimum Interrogation Standards – developed by its Advisory Council
of Jurists.
Registers
Maintaining official registers provides a crucial safeguard for detainees. They are an important tool for
recording the location of each person throughout the period of their detention, as well as making sure
that proper detention procedures are followed. Registers should be kept rigorously in all places of
detention and police stations. The registers should be readily accessible to all concerned parties.26
Gaps and inconsistencies in register entries can alert monitoring teams to potential risks for torture or
ill-treatment.
Separating interrogation and custody

Interrogation and custody should be the responsibility of different bodies. Different agencies have
different priorities, different areas of expertise and different chains of commands. The involvement of
different agencies can help protect detainees from the possibility that the conditions of their detention
will be used to influence their behaviour during interrogation. In addition, each agency can act as a
check on the work of the other.
Code of conduct for interrogations

There should be a code of conduct which sets out detailed and specific standards for the conduct of
police interviews. The code should address issues such as the permissible length of the interview, rest
periods, the location and identity of persons to be present during the interview and interviewing a person
under the influence of drugs. The process of developing this code is useful in itself as it encourages
police officials to consider what practices are appropriate and effective for their work. The code of
conduct should be publicly available and provided to all persons deprived of their liberty.
Audio and/or video recording of interrogations

Audio or video recording not only brings greater transparency to the interrogation process, it can also
provide significant advantages for the police. Audio or video recording helps monitor and ensure that an
established code of conduct is followed by police during interrogations.
26 In its general comment No. 20, the Human Rights Committee states that “[t]o guarantee the effective protection of detained
persons, provisions should be made for detainees to be held in places officially recognized as places of detention, and for their
names and places of detention, as well as for the names of persons responsible for their detention, to be kept in registers readily
available and accessible to those concerned, including relatives and friends” (para. 11).

Independent inspection mechanisms

Regular and unannounced visits to all places of detention by independent monitoring bodies helps
prevent a culture of secrecy from developing and provides an important safeguard for persons deprived
of their liberty.
Watch
Go to the Preventing Torture CD-Rom to watch more on how NHRIs can
promote reforms to laws and policies to prevent torture and ill-treatment.
Click on ‘Feature materials’ and then select ‘Item 3 – NHRIs: Reforming laws
and policies’.

• NHRIs can promote ratification of relevant international human rights
treaties, such as the Convention against Torture and its Optional Protocol.
• NHRIs can promote legal reform, in particular making torture a crime
under domestic law.
• NHRIs can promote reform of detention procedures.
Further reading
Criminalisation of Torture: State Obligations under the United Nations
Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment; Sir Nigel Rodley and Matt Pollard; E.H.R.L.R.
Issue 2, Sweet and Maxwell; 2006
In the CD-Rom
Committee against Torture, general comment No. 2, Implementation of article 2
by States Parties
Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 20: replaces general
comment 7 concerning prohibition of torture and cruel treatment or
punishment (art. 7)
Advisory Council of Jurists Reference on Torture (includes Minimum
Interrogation Standards); Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights
Institutions; 2005
Bringing the International Prohibition of Torture Home: National
Implementation Guide for the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment; The Redress Trust; 2006
Torture in International Law: A Guide to Jurisprudence; Association for the Prevention of
Torture and the Center for Justice and International Law; 2008
The Right of Access to Lawyers for Persons Deprived of Liberty; Legal Briefing Series,
Association for the Prevention of Torture; March 2010

Section II
Contributing to the implementation
of the legal framework

35
Chapter 4:
Investigating allegations of torture
Key questions
• What type of information helps assess the credibility of a victim’s
testimony?
• What other type of information should be collected when investigating
allegations of torture?
• How should information about allegations of torture be recorded?

Paris Principles
Methods of operation
Within the framework of its operation, the national institution shall:
a) Hear any person and obtain any information and any documents
necessary for assessing situations falling within its competence
Additional principles concerning the status of commissions with quasi-jurisdictional

competence
A national institution may be authorized to hear and consider complaints and petitions
concerning individual situations. Cases may be brought before it by individuals, their
representatives, third parties, non-governmental organizations, associations of trade unions
or any other representative organizations.
Introduction
Investigating and documenting allegations of torture is critical in any strategy to prevent torture. NHRIs
should investigate and document any complaints they receive from victims of their relatives, as well as
initiate their own investigations if they believe that torture or ill-treatment may be occurring in certain
places of detention.
It is important to note that victims of torture can suffer serious physical and psychological damage. As
a result, they may be reluctant to talk about their experience.
1. Collecting information
When a person claims to be victim of torture, it is important to collect all possible information that might
help support the allegation.
36 | Chapter 4: Investigating allegations of torture

Part II Preventing torture: NHRIs in action | Section II Contributing to the implementation of the legal framework
The first step is to conduct an interview with the alleged victim as promptly as possible (see chapter 5
for more information). Following the interview, it is crucial to check the information you have collected
and assess the reliability of the allegations made.27
To help you make this assessment, it is important to consider if:
• the testimony is convincing and internally consistent

• the testimony is consistent with information from other independent sources
• the testimony corresponds to known patterns of torture and ill-treatment
• other testimonies corroborate the victim’s statement
• other physical corroboration is found during on-site visits
• there is medical evidence of torture
• there are physical indicators of torture (however, the absence of physical signs does not mean
that torture did not occur)
• there are psychological indicators of torture.
The testimony is convincing and internally consistent

In some allegations of torture it may be difficult to find evidence other than the testimony of the victim.
If the victim’s account sounds true – in other words, the account is consistent and does not contradict
itself – this will provide an important first step in your inquiries. Where possible, this account should be
matched with other types of information that may provide corroboration. It is essential, therefore, to
gather as much detailed information as possible.
It is important to bear in mind the particular difficulties involved in taking statements from victims of torture,
as many will have been traumatized by the experience. They may give inaccurate information because
they are ashamed of what has been done to them or they may be reluctant to disclose information for
other reasons. Their distress may also cause them to appear evasive. People who have been victims of
sexual assault may feel particularly ashamed and unable to speak about the experience.
The testimony is consistent with information from other independent

sources
The testimony corresponds to known patterns of torture and ill-treatment
It can often be difficult to cross-check the details of a specific allegation of torture, however, it is possible
to check it against information that is already known. This information might relate to agencies that are
likely to commit torture, to places where torture is likely to occur and to allegations of torture that have
been reported in the past.
Other testimonies corroborate the victim’s statement

By its very nature, torture is almost always carried out in secret. As a result it can be difficult to find and
interview the sort of witnesses that might be available when investigating other human rights violations.
However, there are still potential witnesses who may be able to corroborate a victim’s allegation of
torture including:
• people who were present when the victim was taken into custody. They might provide information
about who took the victim away, when this happened, how the person was treated and the
physical condition of the person at that time.
27 Complete accuracy is seldom expected of torture victims. See Kisoki v. Sweden, Committee against Torture, Communication
41/1996, views adopted on 8 May 1996.
Chapter 4: Investigating allegations of torture | 37

• people who were detained with the victim. They might provide information about who took the
person for interrogation, when the person was interrogated, how long the interrogation lasted,
the physical condition of the victim before and after interrogation and the account the victim gave
to them at the time.
• prison officials or law enforcement officers who may have been present during the torture and
who object to its use. They may be willing to provide information on a confidential basis.
Information found during visits to places of detention

NHRIs that have access to places of detention can gather corroborating information when they undertake
visits in response to an allegation of torture. During these visits, NHRI representatives can verify the
description of the building and rooms, check the registers and verify other information, such as the date
and time of a person’s admission, removal from the cell and the names of guards on duty.
There is medical evidence of torture

There are four types of potential medical evidence that can be used to corroborate allegations of torture.
They include:
• a medical examination of the victim at the time, or shortly after, the torture is alleged to have taken
place
• a physical examination of the victim at the time s/he made the complaint
• a psychological examination of the victim
• a post-mortem examination (autopsy).

Medical evidence should be treated with caution as a medical examination alone cannot prove an
allegation of torture. However, it may be consistent with the allegation and can therefore provide important
corroborating information. It is recommended that any medical evidence is gathered and compiled by a
physician with proper forensic skills.
NHRIs might face difficulties in finding appropriately qualified medical personnel. Indeed, some NHRIs
may face a situation where there are no skilled forensic medical personnel in the country. In this case,
one possible solution may be to seek outside assistance to train medical personnel in forensic skills.
In other countries, there might be a lack of independent forensic medical personnel, particularly if they all
work for government agencies and/or provide forensic expertise for the police or public prosecutor. NHRIs
will then have to assess whether they, and the victim, can trust the independence and professionalism
of these personnel.
There are physical signs of torture

Medical examination of victims of torture must be left to medical professionals. However, with experience,
a human rights investigator can come to recognize some of the most common signs of torture.
It is often useful to take photographs of the physical signs of torture, if the victim gives his or her consent.
However, such photographs should not identify the person (for example, by showing the face). Several
pictures should be taken to record all aspects of these physical signs. Clear colour photographs, taken
in good lights, can form part of the corroborating evidence and be provided to medical personnel for
professional evaluation. It is important to take close-up photographs of the injuries and wide-angle
photographs showing the location of the injuries on specific parts of the body.
Some of the common types of torture, and the physical signs that result from this, include:
• beating and other blunt violence, which can cause broken bones, bruises, scars and tramline
stripes (from beatings with a cane or stick)
• beatings on the sole of the feet, which can result in intermittent pain in the feet and legs, tingling
and “pins and needles” in the legs and feet, as well as hard, rough scars on the soles
• burning, which can leave scars of varying shapes and sizes
• suspension, which causes a burning sensation and sharp pains in the arms and legs
• electrical torture, which can cause changes to the skin and splintering or loss of teeth
• partial suffocation with water, which can lead to chronic bronchitis
• sexual torture, which can result in injuries to the genital area, irregular periods, spontaneous
abortions, testicular pain, anal itching, sexually transmitted disease and sexual dysfunction.
Image: Palestinian Independent Commission for Human Rights

The absence of physical signs of torture does not mean that torture has not taken place. Some methods
of torture do not leave any physical signs, such as sensory deprivation and other forms of psychological
torture.
There are psychological signs of torture

All torture will have psychological effects on a person. Indeed, a primary purpose of torture is to exercise
power over a helpless victim with the aim of degrading, dehumanizing and disintegrating his or her personality.
The impact of this experience can continue long after the physical scars of torture have healed.
There are two distinct, although closely linked, aspects to consider when it comes to gathering evidence
of psychological signs of torture. It is important to be clear if you are collecting evidence of psychological
torture or whether you are collecting psychological evidence of torture.
The term “psychological torture” refers to methods of torture that do not involve direct physical pain.
These methods can include threats of death, mock execution or sensory deprivation. In these cases,
there will be no physical evidence of torture and the psychological signs may be the only evidence
available to you.
On the other hand, the psychological evidence of torture refers to the mental health consequences of
torture, regardless of whether the torture was physical, mental or a combination of both.
The psychological effect of torture is sometimes described as post-traumatic stress disorder. However,
some psychologists dispute this description, believing that it is too culturally rooted in Western society.
Victims of torture from other cultures may not suffer exactly the same combination of symptoms and
they believe it may be not helpful to use labels in this way.
However, people who have been tortured may:
• have constant distressing recollections of the event

• experience recurrent nightmares of the event
• feel distress at things that remind them of their torture
• try to avoid situations that will remind them of their torture
• be unable to remember aspects of what happened
• feel detached from the world around them.
These responses can manifest in a number of physical symptoms, such as:
• difficulty sleeping
• irritability or anger
• difficulty concentrating
• hyper-vigilance
• exaggerated startled response.
It is important to determine whether a person shows symptoms of psychological trauma and whether
this correlates with his or her allegations of torture.
Watch
Go to the Preventing Torture CD-Rom to watch more on NHRIs and their
role to investigate allegations of torture and ill-treatment.
Click on ‘Feature materials’ and then select ‘Item 4 – NHRIs: Investigating
allegations’.

2. Recording information
The only purpose for NHRIs to gather information about allegations of torture is so it can be recorded
and used. Statements and interviews with victims should be written down.
All the information gathered in relation to an allegation of torture should be properly recorded in a file,
including:
• testimonies
• statements or complaints
• medical records
• photographs
• affidavits
• information and responses from the authorities
• other information (such as reports from on-site visits to places of detention).
In addition, NHRIs should also keep reports of torture and ill-treatment from other sources, including:
• decisions in relevant court cases

• reports prepared by non-governmental organizations
• reports of international and regional bodies (such as the United Nations Special Rapporteur on
Torture or the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture)
• media reports of torture.
This information is useful to help to cross-check allegations and identify patterns of abuses.
All information collected should be formally recorded using a standard format that allows others within
the NHRI to analyse and use it appropriately. A standard reporting format allows for cross-checking
between different cases and establishing patterns of torture and ill-treatment.
NHRIs that have the capacity to do so should maintain a computer database or spreadsheet of
complaints of torture they have received.
Records with confidential information should be kept in a secure location at all times. As an additional
precaution, NHRIs can consider identifying files by numbers, rather than by names, with the corresponding
list of names filed separately from the substantive records.
On 10 August 1993, in response to concerns over the poor quality of post-mortem inquiries,
the National Human Rights Commission of India instructed Chief Ministers of States that all
post-mortems of custodial deaths must be videotaped and sent to the Commission.
The NHRC expressed its concern over deliberate cover-ups, noting that “a systematic attempt is
being made to suppress the truth and the report is merely the police version of the incident. The
post-mortem report was intended to be the most valuable record and considerable importance
was being placed on this document in drawing conclusions about the death.”
The NHRC also highlighted its concerns about pressure being placed on the medical profession
by police officials. “The Commission is of a prima-facie view that the local doctor succumbs
to police pressure which leads to distortion of the facts. The Commission would like that all
post-mortem examinations done in respect of deaths in police custody and in jails should be
video-filmed and cassettes be sent to the Commission along with the post-mortem report. The
Commission is alive to the fact that the process of video-filming will involve extra cost but you
would agree that human life is more valuable than the cost of video filming and such occasions
should be very limited.”


• Internal consistency of a testimony is an important element that can
support allegations of torture. Other corroborating information should
also be sought.
• Medical documentation, as well physical or psychological signs of torture,
can provide further evidence of torture.
• Formally recording the evidence gathered is crucial.
Further reading
In the CD-Rom
National Human Rights Institutions: Handbook on the Establishment and
Strengthening of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of
Human Rights, Professional Training Series No. 4; OHCHR; 1995
Training Manual on Human Rights Monitoring; Professional Training Series
No. 7; OHCHR; 2001
Istanbul Protocol: Manual on the Effective Investigation and Documentation
of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment; Professional Training Series No. 8; OHCHR; 2001
The Torture Reporting Handbook, Camille Giffard, Human Rights Centre,

Chapter 5:
Interviewing
Key questions
• What is the purpose of interviewing a victim or a witness?
• How should you prepare for an interview?
• What are the key issues to consider when conducting an interview?
• What are the specific challenges involved in interviewing victims of
trauma?

Paris Principles
Methods of operation
Within the framework of its operation, the national institution shall:
b) Hear any person and obtain any information and any documents
necessary for assessing situations falling within its competence
Introduction
There are a number of different situations where representatives of NHRIs will be required to conduct
an interview, including:
• as part of a formal or official inquiry

• when a person visits the office of the NHRI to file a complaint
• during a visit to a place of detention
• in the course of field investigation
• in a meeting with an official.
Preparing for and conducting interviews should always be done with the specific context in mind.
Applying all of the following practices may not be possible in every situation; however, the key principles
are worth noting.
1. Purpose of an interview
An interview allows you to:
• gather many different pieces of information from a single interviewee

• respond to information that the interviewee gives you
• cross-check information that you already have
• assess whether the interviewee is credible
• provide the interviewee with the chance to tell their story.
Chapter 5: Interviewing | 43
A key challenge you can face is that the reason you are conducting the interview may not be the same
as the reason the interviewee agreed to speak with you. As a result, what the interviewee wants to tell
you may not be the information you are looking to collect. In these situations you should pursue your
objective at the same time as respecting the interviewee’s wish to share information that is important to
them. You have no power to make someone tell you something they do not want to share.
Gather many pieces of information from a single interviewee

An interview allows people to describe events that they have experienced. At the simplest level, someone
you are interviewing might primarily talk about something that has happened to them. However, they
may also have knowledge of other people’s cases and the information they provide may help corroborate
another person’s testimony. It may also help determine whether there is a pattern of torture or if it is a
systemic practice.
Respond to information that the interviewee provides

One of the benefits of conducting interviews is the opportunity to respond directly to information that is
provided by the interviewee and to ask follow-up questions. This interaction with the interviewee may
help you to understand an issue in greater detail or provide new and revealing information on an issue
that you had not anticipated.
Cross-check information
Interviews may also allow you to cross-check and confirm – or not – information that you have collected
from other person.
44 | Chapter 5: Interviewing
Assess whether the witness is credible

The interview process provides you with an important opportunity to assess the credibility of the person
and the information they are providing. While it is difficult to describe precisely how you assess this, there
is no doubt that a face-to-face interview is more effective than relying on a written statement. This is
why courts rely on oral testimonies of witnesses rather than just written statements. When someone is
telling their own story in their own words, it allows you to determine whether you think they are telling the
truth. An interview also allows you to ask difficult questions, which a person who is not telling the truth
might prefer to avoid. It also requires the interviewee to respond to questions immediately, rather than
having time to prepare a written response. Asking the same question in different ways can also help test
whether the person’s story is consistent.
Allow witnesses to tell their story

Victims of human rights violations often feel that they have been neglected, marginalized and forgotten.
Sometimes the violations they have suffered will be the cause of stigma and isolation from their
communities. Often they will not have had the chance to tell their story to authorities. The interview
might be the first opportunity for the person to talk about their experience. Therefore, listening is more
important than asking questions.
2. Protection of interviewees
When conducting interviews with victims or witnesses, it is important to consider their need for
protection.
While there can be no complete assurance that the interviewee will not face retaliation or reprisals after
the interview, several measures may be taken to protect the person, such as:
• interviewing a significant number of people to avoid focusing attention on the one person
• conducting the interview in a safe place where surveillance is minimal
• asking what security precautions the person believes should be taken at the start and the end of
the interview
• inviting the person to keep in contact with you after the interview
• in places of detention, conducting a follow-up visit shortly after the interview and meeting with
the same detainees
• never referring explicitly during the interview to statements made by other persons and never
revealing the identity of witnesses.
3. Preparing for an interview

Many potential difficulties encountered in interviews can be effectively managed through proper
preparation. Developing a pre-interview planning routine will often not require much time and, after a
while, can become second nature.
When interviewing a victim or a witness of torture or ill-treatment, it is important to follow ethical principles
and for the interview to be as predictable as possible. This allows the interviewee to feel empowered.
This is particularly important for victims, as torture and ill-treatment often creates strong and persistent
feelings of powerlessness. When preparing for the interview, the interviewer should always be conscious
of helping to empower the victim.
The location
If you are carrying out the interview in the office of the NHRI, the surroundings should be as comfortable
and welcoming as possible, with a glass of water or a cup of tea or coffee to offer the person.
If you are not interviewing the person in your own offices, select a location that provides the greatest
sense of privacy and minimizes the potential for eavesdropping or retaliation. The room should be as
comfortable as possible and should not have negative associations for the interviewee. In places of
detention, the interview should be conducted in a location where the person can feel confident that the
conversation cannot be overheard. Ask the person if s/he feels comfortable and safe.
Selecting an interviewer
It is important to select the most appropriate person from the NHRI to conduct the interview. Issues such
as gender, knowledge of the issues or the case, language skills and sensitivity to cultural differences are
important considerations. In some cases, there may be no choice about who will conduct the interview.
However, it is always important to reflect on how the interviewee may perceive the interviewer and
whether this could create some barriers to conducting an effective interview. Ask the person if s/he feels
comfortable being interviewed by a man or woman. If there is no option, the interviewer should describe
his or her experience in dealing with such cases and reassure the person that s/he is sensitive to the
difficulty of talking about a traumatic experience.
Duration of the interview

It is important for victims of torture to have enough time to tell their story at their own pace and in their
own words, without being rushed or interrupted. A failure to appreciate this might mean some people
are reluctant to talk. At the same time, the session should not be too long, as this could be stressful for
the victim. Therefore, a balance needs to be struck between these two competing demands. In addition,
it may be necessary to conduct more than one interview in order to have the story told in full. The
possibility of subsequent interviews should be considered in this planning stage. However, as it may not
always be possible to conduct more than one interview, you should seek to gather as much essential
information as possible by asking the right open-ended questions.
Learning about the case

The interview may relate to an incident about which you already have some knowledge. If so, you
should compile and review any available information, such as media reports, reports prepared by non-
governmental organizations or civil society groups or notes from interviews with other witnesses.
Preparing questions
Sometimes you may not know in advance the topic of the interview or the person you will be interviewing;
for instance when a person arrives at the office of the NHRI and wishes to make a complaint. In most
cases, however, you will know what the interview is about and can prepare some questions.
Questions should be open-ended and non-leading. They should also focus on the key elements of who,
what, when, where, how and why.
However, you should not rely too heavily on a prepared questionnaire or incident sheet. It can help
to memorize the key questions. Eye contact and establishing rapport with the interviewee are more
important than working through a set list of questions. You can, however, refer to this list at the end of
the interview to make sure that you have asked all the important questions.
In most cases you will want to interview a person privately, in order to ensure the confidentiality of the
interview process. However, a victim may want to be accompanied by a person of trust and this request
should be respected.
4. Conducting an interview
4.1. General considerations
Conducting an interview is a sensitive task which requires the interviewer to have:
• an ability to listen
• patience
• objectivity
• empathy
• critical distance
• memory
• an ability to reformulate.
Confidentiality and security

The issue of confidentiality should be clarified at the beginning of the interview and must be respected
by the interviewer. You should clearly explain how the information will be used (such as in an internal
report, external report or communication with authorities) and whether it will be necessary to use the
name and personal details of the interviewee. You will also need to obtain the informed consent of the
interviewee. During the interview, you should not mention sources of any other information (unless the
source is public) and you should keep the identity of other witnesses confidential.
Working with an interpreter

The interview should be conducted in the language that the interviewee finds most comfortable and
with an interviewer who is fluent in that language. If this not possible, you may need to arrange for an
interpreter to be present.
Interpreting is a difficult job and simply having knowledge of both languages may not be sufficient. In
some situations, it might be difficult to find an interpreter who is seen as impartial. The interviewer should
discuss the situation with the interviewee to find out if there are any reasons that would make a particular
interpreter unsuitable.
Preparation for the interview is important and the interviewer should explain the ground rules to the
interpreter in private, before the interview commences. This can also be an opportunity to go through
the proposed list of interview questions. Interpreters must be reminded that all information discussed
during the interview is strictly confidential.
Interviewers should remember to speak directly to, and listen to, the interviewee, as there can often be
a tendency to talk “through” the interpreter. A great deal can be learned by observing the interviewee,
even if you do not understand the language. It is also important to frame questions in the second
person, rather than the third person, when speaking through an interpreter (for example, “What did you
do?” rather than “What happened to him next?”).
It can also be useful to prepare a code of practice for interpreters. This is not only useful for the work
of the interviewer and the interpreter; it can also help the interviewee to better understand the role and
responsibilities of the interpreter. Further, the code of practice could be signed by the interpreter and a
copy given to the interviewee in a language s/he understands.
In places of detention, this issue of confidentiality is even more important in building a relationship of
trust with the detainee. Accordingly, prison officers, other prison staff and other detainees should not be
used for interpretation.
Taking notes
A thorough record of the interview should be kept and, at the very least, notes need to be taken. The
notes should be in direct speech and use the exact words of the interviewee to the greatest possible
extent. Confirm with the interviewee that the information recorded is accurate. This does not mean
reading the entire notes of the interview; only those parts where there may be some uncertainty.
Tape recording the interview presents serious security concerns that should be closely considered. If
security conditions permit, tape recording may be better than written notes as it provides a word-for-word
record of the whole interview. However, transcribing the interview afterwards can be time-consuming
and, therefore, it might be sufficient to transcribe only the most relevant sections of the interview.
Taking notes or taping the interview should always be agreed with the interviewee at the start of the
interview. When conducting interviews in places of detention, the use of an audio tape may present an
unacceptable level of risk to the interviewee. Even if the interviewee does agree to the interview being
taped, s/he may not be as open and forthcoming as might otherwise have been the case. It is better to
have a full and frank interview, taking written notes, than a limited interview that is taped.
If an interviewee chooses not to be taped at the beginning of the interview, it is always possible to ask
later on in the interview, when s/he is feeling more settled, whether it is possible to tape the remainder of
the interview. Alternatively, an interviewee might be prepared to speak briefly on tape at the conclusion
of an untaped interview.
When taping interviews, appropriate technical preparation should be taken, such as checking batteries,
ensuring there are sufficient blank tapes and testing the equipment. Even if an interview is being taped,
written notes should also be taken.
The information collected in the interview can be used to complete an incident sheet or included in some
other format for recording data.
4.2. Different stages of the interview

Starting the interview
The start of the interview is crucial for establishing rapport with the interviewee and building a sense
of confidence and trust. How you introduce yourself is very important and also shows respect for the
interviewee. You know why you want to conduct the interview, however, the interviewee may not.
The introduction allows you to explain who you are, the role of the NHRI, what information you are
looking to collect and what you will do with the information after the interview. It is important to make no
threat or promise and not to create any false expectations. It is essential to clearly explain what you can
do and what you cannot do.
You should clearly explain what will be done with the information the interviewee provides (whether it
will be used in an internal or external report or shared with the authorities) and discuss the extent to
which the interviewee may require the information to remain confidential. While most interviewees may
not object to the details of their case being included in a public report, they may want their personal
details, or any information that may identify them, to remain confidential. You should ensure that the
interviewee provides his or her informed consent to the disclosure of this information and record this at
the beginning of the interview notes.
The interview should start with an open question, such as “What would like to tell me about?” Some
victims of torture can be confused or distressed, while others may have so much they want to say
that they do not know how to start. Encourage the interviewee to tell their story in a logical, possibly
chronologically, sequence. This can be done by inviting the interviewee to “Start at the beginning …”
and then continue by asking “What happened next?”
If something is unclear, do not interrupt unless it is absolutely necessary. Make a note and come back
to the question later on. You may need to collect specific details on particular aspects of the story but
the first priority is to listen to the story as a whole.
Conducting the interview

Open and non-leading questions should be used during the early stages of the interview.
An open question is one that invites a person to provide a detailed response, rather than a simple answer
of “yes”, “no” or a short fact. Open questions also give control of the conversation to the interviewee, as
it allows him or her to choose how much information is shared.
A leading question is one where the suggested answer is contained within the question. For example,
instead of asking “Did the police torture you?”, you should ask “How did the police treat you?”
As the interview progresses, you may need to ask some closed questions to clarify or confirm certain
information.
The interviewer also has to be careful not to coach the interviewee by suggesting answers to questions
or lines of evidence.
The art of listening is crucial to conducting effective interviews. The following principles provide a useful
guide when interviewing victims of torture.
• Let the interviewee narrate his or her story. They know what they want to say. Do not dominate
the conversation and do not talk too much yourself.
• Listen to the person. Good listening means hearing what the interviewee is actually saying, not
what you think s/he is saying.
• Ask questions that respond to what the person is telling you. Do not simply move through a set
list of questions and ignore what you are being told.
• Be sensitive to how the interviewee feels about the information they are sharing with you and be
sensitive to non-verbal signs, such as body language.
• Allow moments of silence in the interview – do not rush the person.
• Be aware of your own body language.
• Maintain a friendly, polite and sympathetic attitude towards the interviewee.
• Be sensitive to cultural differences in questioning and being questioned.
Even if you want to probe for information – or if you do not believe the story you are being told – it is
important to respect the interviewee and allow them to tell their story in their own words and at their
own pace.
The presence of an additional person at the interview can be considered, although this should be done
with the agreement of the interviewee. This person can confirm that the interview was freely given and
that the interviewee was not subjected to any pressure from the interviewer. S/he can help monitor the
level of stress of the interviewee and assess whether there is a need to take a break or to postpone the
interview to a later time. This person can also take notes of the interview, allowing the interviewer to
concentrate solely on the interview and building rapport with the interviewee.
Closing the interview

It is advisable to collect standard information about the person – such as name, address, occupation,
ethnicity and age – at the end of the interview. This overcomes the risk that the interview begins like an
interrogation.
Before closing the interview, you should clearly explain what will happen next and what you will do with
the information you have recorded. You should check that the interviewee has understood this. It is also
essential to clarify whether the information was given anonymously or whether the interviewee is willing
to consent to the use of the information and his or her name.
It is important to close the interview with an open question, such as “Do you have anything else to
add?” This reminds the interviewee that it is his or her last chance to speak and it may prompt additional
important information.
The interviewer should also establish a process for keeping in contact with the interviewee, either by
telephone or through a reliable contact. The interviewee should know how to contact the NHRI – quickly
and at any time – in the event of threats or reprisal or in order to provide additional information.
Watch
Go to the Preventing Torture CD-Rom to watch a role play that highlights
good practice approaches when interviewing a person in a place of
detention.
Click on ‘Feature materials’ and then select ‘Item 5 – Role play: Interviewing
a person in detention’.
5. After the interview

Immediate follow-up
It can be difficult to set aside time to think about an interview immediately after it has finished, particularly
if you are conducting a number of interviews in quick succession. However, it is helpful to take a few
minutes to go over your interview notes. This can provide ideas for other people to interview or additional
sources of information about the same event.
Write up the interview notes, or transcribe the interview recording, as soon as possible. The advantage
is that you are more likely to remember information that may not be clear in your notes. It might also give
you the chance to go back to the interviewee if you have further questions.
In writing up your notes, you should use direct speech and the exact words of the interviewee as much
as possible. The best evidence is what the person actually said, not how you interpreted or summarized
the information. In writing up these notes, it is preferable to compile the information in chronological
order.
Statements and affidavits

A statement is simply a written account of an incident provided by a person and using their own words.
An affidavit is a sworn statement. This means that the person has sworn, in front of a lawyer or judicial
officer, that the contents of the statement are true. Nothing can guarantee that an affidavit is true,
although it does carry more weight as evidence than interview notes. There are also legal sanctions for
false declarations made under oath.
Whether the information you obtain is in the form of a statement or affidavit will depend on the mandate
of the NHRI and/or the purpose for collecting the information. If the information is to be included in an
internal or external report, then it may be sufficient to collect a statement from an interviewee. However,
if the information is intended for use in legal proceedings, such as a criminal prosecution, or it is the
basis of a formal complaint, then it may be necessary to obtain an affidavit.
It is easier to prepare an affidavit if you decide before the interview that this is what you intend to do.
Begin by inviting the interviewee to tell their story slowly. The interviewee should describe only what
they have seen, heard or experienced directly, not what they have been told by others. You should write
only what you are told and refrain from adding anything or imposing your own interpretation. As far as
possible, an affidavit should be in direct speech and use the person’s own words. Each legal system
will require an affidavit to be prepared according to a certain format. Unfortunately this may sometimes
require the use of language that is more complex than strictly necessary.
6. Interviewing victims of trauma

Interviewing victims of trauma
People who have survived extreme events will often suffer a serious stress reaction, usually called post-
traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
PTSD is usually divided into two phases:
• an acute phase, where common symptoms include flashbacks, nightmares and intrusive thoughts
• a chronic phase, which follows the acute phase if treatment is not provided and can include
symptoms such as depression and lack of concentration.
When a person is in the chronic phase of PTSD they may not realize that the symptoms they are
experiencing are related to the trauma s/he has suffered.
Other characteristics that a person who has gone through a traumatic event might display include:
• constantly recalling the event

• trying to avoid remembering the event
• physical symptoms, such as insomnia, irritability or hyper-vigilance.
All of these factors can pose challenges when conducting an interview. For example, if someone is short
of sleep or has difficulty concentrating it may it hard for them to sustain an interview over an extended
period of time. In this situation it might be preferable to have several short interviews.
It will also be challenging to conduct an interview with a person who is trying to avoid remembering
the event. In some situations, it is not a conscious decision to block the memory. It can be common
for people who have gone through traumatic experiences to suffer amnesia. The interview process,
while painful, may actually help someone overcome this response, although this must be handled in a
sensitive and sympathetic way
In some circumstances, an interviewee may also begin to re-experience the traumatic event. As an
interviewer, you must be alert to this possibility. If it appears that the interviewee is reliving or awakening
memories of the experience, stop the interview immediately and discuss this with the person.
Interviewing victims of torture

Interviewing victims of torture is an extremely delicate process. As an interviewer, you must be prepared
to deal with difficult emotions and be able to empathize with the victim. Individuals should not be forced
to talk about their experience if it makes them feel unconformable. Further, torture survivors may have
difficulty remembering specific details and inconsistencies may arise.
As mentioned above, the interview process may have the effect of reawakening traumatic memories for the
person. If this occurs, it is important to stop the interview, express your concern and awareness of what
the person is experiencing and clarify the confidential nature of the interview. It may be necessary to take a
break from the interview to let the person recover or to come back at another time for a second interview.
Interviewing victims of rape

Victims of rape and other forms of sexual violence are also likely to suffer from trauma. Some psychologists
call this rape trauma syndrome (RTS).
RTS is usually divided into three phases:
• the impact phase, where the victim is likely to experience a wide range of emotional reactions,
which may be openly expressed or kept under tight control
• the acute phase, where symptoms are similar to the acute phase of PTSD and include flashbacks,
fear and intrusive thoughts; further, the physical consequences of rape can be very distressing,
particularly the fear of HIV infection or other sexually transmitted diseases
• the chronic phase, which like PTSD, will follow the acute phase if treatment is not provided.
Constant reassurance can do no harm to rape victims and others affected by trauma. If they are willing
to talk, invite them to discuss how their emotional reactions are linked to what they have suffered.
However, ask them to tell you the details of their experience only when they are ready.
People who have been raped often share similar responses to victims of torture. Low self-esteem is a
common characteristic. This is partly a psychological consequence of the trauma but also frequently a
reflection of social attitudes which can hold rape victims partly to blame. Therefore, when conducting an
interview, it is crucial to be non-judgmental and to place no hint of blame on the person. Rape victims
may not want to talk about what happened to them; do not force them.
Interviewing persons deprived of liberty (see also chapter 8)

Interviews with people in places of detention are different from interviews carried out in the privacy and
security of the NHRI office. The importance of gaining the trust of the interviewee cannot be stressed
enough. It is even more important to not do anything that could betray that trust. All precautions should
be taken so the safety and security of the interviewee is not compromised. These interviews should be
conducted without a witness and take place in a private location, out of sight and hearing of others.
The purpose of conducting interviews in places of detention can vary, especially if they form part of
a preventive visit. As the detainee may not fully understand the purpose of the interview, and have
particular expectations relating to their individual situation, it is important that you clearly explain its aim
at the outset. As the interviewer, you should also describe what you can do and what you cannot do.
Further, you should not make any promise that you cannot keep or raise false expectations.
Persons deprived of their liberty who have suffered torture should be asked whether the information
they provide can be used and, if so, in what way. For example, you should clearly ask for the person’s
consent regarding the use of his or her name. However, because of a fear of reprisal, s/he may prefer
that the information is kept anonymous.
Watch
Go to the Preventing Torture CD-Rom to watch Professor Manfred Nowak,
United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture, discussing some of the steps
involved in interviewing people held in places of detention.
Click on ‘Feature materials’ and then select ‘Item 6 – Conducting interviews
in places of detention’.
Interviewing women
It might be difficult for a man to interview a woman, even when the subject matter of the interview is
not sensitive. A woman is often more willing to talk to another woman. This consideration is especially
important when discussing an experience of sexual assault. It is difficult enough for a woman to talk to
anyone about an experience of this nature and a man, however sympathetic, is likely to trigger fears and
feelings of vulnerability associated with the assault. Therefore, it is very important to ask the interviewee
about her preferences in this regard.
Interviewing children
Children perceive the world very differently from adults and this fact should be appreciated when
preparing to interview a child. The issue of power relations should also be carefully considered, as a
child will always feel inferior to an adult interviewer and is therefore more likely to provide compliant
answers.
The age and developmental stage of the child must also be taken into account, as this will greatly influence
the child’s capacity to tell his or her story. For instance, can the child talk freely and uninterrupted? Or is
s/he better able to respond to specific questions?
If the interview relates to an allegation of physical abuse, a child is likely to feel anxious and reticent
to discuss the issue. It is important to be extremely patient. Often several interviews will be necessary
before a child will trust you sufficiently to confide in you. It may also be helpful to consider using other
methods of communication, such as drawing or using pictures or images (sad faces / smiley faces).
The child should be asked whether s/he has a preference regarding the gender of the interviewer. During
an interview, you should also be attentive to signs that the child is growing anxious or overwhelmed and,
when necessary, offer a break.

• Interviewing is important for a number of purposes, such as collecting information,
assessing its credibility and cross-checking.
• It is crucial to prepare for an interview and to be clear about what you
hope to achieve.
• Interviewing is a delicate task and a primary goal is to build rapport
with the interviewee. Basic principles should be followed in terms of
opening the interview, asking open and non-leading questions, closing
the interview and respecting confidentiality.
• Follow-up is essential, for example by preparing an affidavit or
identifying other people to interview.
• Interviewing victims of trauma poses specific challenges; an interviewer needs to be
prepared for this and know how to respond appropriately.
Further reading
In the CD-Rom
Training Manual on Human Rights Monitoring (see Chapter VIII: Interviewing);
Professional Training Series No. 7; OHCHR; 2001
Istanbul Protocol: Manual on the Effective Investigation and Documentation
of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment;
Professional Training Series No. 8; OHCHR; 2001
The Torture Reporting Handbook; Camille Giffard, Human Rights Centre,
Chapter 6:
Training public officials
Key questions
• What type of training activities can NHRIs undertake to assist in the
prevention of torture and ill-treatment?
• What are the advantages and disadvantages for NHRIs in directly
delivering training courses for public officials?

Paris Principles
f) To assist in the formulation of programmes for the teaching of, and
research into, human rights and to take part in their execution in
schools, universities and professional circles.

Training and education
NHRIs should take an active role in educating all sectors of the community. For example
lawyers, journalists, doctors, medical personnel, teachers, police, the military, senior public
officials, the judiciary and legislators, on the meaning and application of the international law
on torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Convention against Torture

Article 10
1. Each State Party shall ensure that education and information regarding the prohibition
against torture are fully included in the training of law enforcement personnel, civil or
military, medical personnel, public officials and other persons who may be involved in
the custody, interrogation or treatment of any individual subjected to any form of arrest,
detention or imprisonment.
Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners

Rule 47
1. The personnel shall possess an adequate standard of education and intelligence.
2. Before entering on duty, the personnel shall be given a course of training in their general
and specific duties and be required to pass theoretical and practical tests.
3. After entering on duty and during their career, the personnel shall maintain and improve
their knowledge and professional capacity by attending courses of in-service training to be
organized at suitable intervals.”
Chapter 6: Training public officials | 55

Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty

Rule 85
The personnel should receive such training as will enable them to carry out their
responsibilities effectively, in particular in child psychology, child welfare and international
standards and norms of human rights and the rights of the child, including the present rules.
Introduction
Providing professional training programmes for public officials is a critical strategy to help prevent torture
and ill-treatment of persons deprived of their liberty.28
All personnel involved in the arrest, interrogation and detention of persons should receive training on
human rights and, in particular, on the absolute prohibition of torture. NHRIs can play an important role in
contributing to the provision of this training by developing training tools and delivering training courses.
However, it is important to note that training programmes offered by NHRIs will generally only be useful
when there is clear political will to prevent torture.
In these cases, training programmes should be integrated into the general work and procedure of the
institution, whether it is a police service or prison service. To achieve the greatest impact, the training
programme should have the strong endorsement and support of that institution’s leadership.
When torture occurs at the instigation of an institution’s authorities, or is tolerated by them, training
will not be the right approach. It may in fact be counterproductive as it provides an opportunity for the
institution’s leadership to publicly promote that they are making efforts to prevent torture.
Police officers and prison warders may also be hostile to what they view as outside interference in how
they do their job. They may resent receiving training from representatives of NHRIs, whom they might
consider to be idealists with no practical understanding of the difficulty of their job.
It is therefore important for NHRIs to carefully consider their strategy for the development and delivery of
training programmes. In some cases the NHRI may not be the most appropriate organization to provide
training. Instead it could contribute to the development and revision of curricula and training materials,
as well as monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of training programmes.
1. Developing and revising training curricula

and materials
Ensuring that human rights standards and principles are included in training curricula for public officials
involved in the arrest, interrogation and detention of people deprived of their liberty is an essential
preventive measure.
According to the Convention against Torture, States parties have a duty to ensure that information on
the prohibition and prevention of torture is included in training programmes for law enforcement and
other public officials.
28 See Human Rights Committee general comment No. 20: “Enforcement personnel, medical personnel, police officers and any
person involved in the custody or treatment of any individual subjected to any form of arrest, detention or imprisonment must
receive appropriate instruction and training. States Parties should inform the Committee of the instruction and training given and
the way in which the prohibition of article 7 forms an integral part of the operational rules and ethical standards to be followed by
such persons” (para. 10).
56 | Chapter 6: Training public officials

NHRIs can monitor how this obligation is implemented in practice. They can assess whether human
rights training, in general, and the prevention of torture, in particular, are properly integrated in the basic
training curricula for police officers, prison officers, army personnel and others. In addition, the curricula
and course materials for ongoing professional training for these groups should also be reviewed.
Where human rights training programmes and materials are non-existent or insufficient, NHRIs
can contribute to the development or revision of curricula, in cooperation with the relevant training
authorities.
It is important to underline the point that training in human rights and torture prevention should not
only provide law enforcement agencies with valuable theoretical knowledge. It should also offer them
practical information and skills that will be useful in their daily work. Human rights and torture prevention
training should therefore be seen as an integral part of operational training.
For example, torture prevention should form a core part of basic training with police officers in a number
of key operational areas, such as:
• arrest
• interrogation
• investigation
• maintenance of public order and demonstration.
Image: Human Rights Commission of the Maldives

In addition to developing and revising curricula, NHRIs can also contribute to the development and revision
of other training materials, such as brochures on the prevention of torture or “train the trainer” manuals.
The Advisory Commission on Human Rights from Luxembourg has launched a project
to thoroughly review the human rights training curricula of the police and other public officials
involved in the deprivation of liberty. The Commission’s report will include recommendations to
revise these curricula.
The Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission has translated the Guidance
Notes on Prison Reform into the two official languages of Afghanistan, Persian and Pashtu.
The Guidance Notes have been published by the International Centre for Prison Studies, King’s
College London, 2004.
As part of its prison reform project, the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights has
organized regular human rights training programmes for prison officers. However, realizing that
there was a need to introduce human rights training at the entry level, the Commission worked in
collaboration with the Kenya Prisons Staff Training College to include a module on human rights
in the basic training curricula. A more detailed module will be developed to provide information on
United Nations standards for treatment of offenders and other aspects related to imprisonment
and conditions of prisons.
2. Delivering training courses

NHRIs can consider delivering training courses for professional groups directly involved in deprivation
of liberty, such as police, prison officers or army personnel. However, because of the strong collective
ethos of these groups, it is usually preferable for officials to be trained on human rights and torture
prevention by people from their own profession.

Another option is to establish a mixed training team, composed of representatives from the NHRI and
representatives from the professional group. Alternatively, NHRIs can focus on developing and running
“train the trainer” courses, with regular follow-up and evaluation included as part of this strategy.
Where appropriate, NHRIs can be involved in directly training public officials. In taking on this role, NHRIs
should take account of the following principles.
• Needs assessment: The content, structure and methodology of the training programme should
be tailored to the meet the identified needs of the organization.
• Selection of participants: Training must be available for officials who have direct contact with
detainees, not just high-ranking officers or new recruits receiving basic training.
• Objectives: Training should have a practical focus to assist officers in their daily work and help
them respond to operational challenges that they face.
• Evaluation: Monitoring the impact of training should be integrated into the training process and
could include follow-up visits, questionnaires or mentoring.
The Venezuelan Ombudsman (Defensoría del Pueblo) has signed an agreement with a non-
governmental organization (Red de Apoyo por la Justicia y la Paz) to jointly train 5,000 police
officers in human rights and torture prevention.
The National Human Rights Commission of Korea conducts training on core international
and national human rights standards regarding correctional systems. The training is based on a
case study approach. Working through practical examples, participants examine real life situations
from different points of view, including that of the detainee, and reflect on established practices.
Since 2004, the Commission has trained 2,617 correction officers and conducted a three-day
human rights training workshop for trainers in detention facilities.
Watch
role to train law enforcement officials on the prevention of torture and ill-
treatment.
Click on ‘Feature materials’ and then select ‘Item 7 – NHRIs: Training law
enforcement officials’.

• Training public officials is an important way that NHRIs can contribute to
the prevention of torture.
• NHRIs can be involved in developing and revising training curricula and
relevant training material on torture prevention.
• NHRIs can develop and deliver training courses which is based on a needs
assessment, contains practical content, involves relevant participants and
includes evaluation.

Further reading
Combating Torture: A Manual for Judges and Prosecutors; Conor Foley,
Human Rights Centre, University of Essex; 2003
To Serve and to Protect: Human Rights and Humanitarian Law for Police
and Security Forces; International Committee of the Red Cross; 1998
Police and Human Rights: A Manual for Teachers, Resources Persons and
Participants in Human Rights Programmes; Ralph Crashaw, Kluwer Law
International; 1999
A Human Rights Approach to Prison Management: Handbook for Prison Staff;
Andrew Coyle; International Centre for Prison Studies; 2002
Understanding Policing; Amnesty International, Netherlands; 2007
In the CD-Rom
National Human Rights Institutions: Handbook on the Establishment and
Strengthening of National Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of
Human Rights, Professional Training Series No. 4; OHCHR; 1995
Human Rights and Law Enforcement: A Manual on Human Rights Training
for the Police; Professional Training Series No. 5; OHCHR; 1997
Human Rights and Law Enforcement: A Trainer’s Guide on Human Rights
for the Police; Professional Training Series No. 5/Add. 2; OHCHR; 2002
Human Rights in the Administration of Justice: A Manual of Human Rights
for Judges, Prosecutors and Lawyers; Professional Training Series No. 9;
OHCHR, in cooperation with the International Bar Association; 2003
Training Package for Prison Officials. Human Rights and Prisons: A Manual
on Human Rights Training for Prison Officials; Professional Training Series No. 11;
OHCHR; 2005

Section III
Acting as a
control mechanism
Chapter 7: Cooperating with international mechanisms

61
Chapter 7:
Cooperating with
international mechanisms
Key questions
• Does interaction with treaty bodies – and the United Nations Committee
against Torture in particular – go beyond submitting shadow reports?
• What opportunities exist for NHRIs to interact with the United Nations
Human Rights Council, in particular in the universal periodic review and
with the Special Rapporteur on Torture?
• Do NHRIs have a role to play in regional complaints mechanisms?
• How can NHRIs interact with international and regional visiting bodies?

Paris Principles
d) To contribute to the reports which States are required to submit to
United Nations bodies and committees, and to regional institutions,
pursuant to their treaty obligations and, where necessary, to express an opinion on the
subject, with due respect for their independence.
e) To cooperate with the United Nations and any other organization in the United Nations
system, the regional institutions and the national institutions of other countries that are
competent in the areas of the promotion and protection of human rights system.

International bodies
NHRIs should encourage their State to issue a standing invitation to the United Nations
Special Rapporteur on Torture and other relevant Rapporteurs of the United Nations to make
visits and reports.
NHRIs should urge their States to ensure that the reporting requirements under relevant
international treaties are up-to-date. They might also consider drafting shadow reports.
NHRIs should urge their States to implement all recommendations and conclusions made
in reports prepared by the relevant monitoring committees and Special Rapporteurs. In this
respect, NHRIs have a supportive role to play.
62 | Chapter 7: Cooperating with international mechanisms

Part II Preventing torture: NHRIs in action | Section III Acting as a control mechanism
Introduction
Most of the human rights instruments prohibiting torture (described in chapter 2) have established
various mechanisms to monitor their implementation. NHRIs can contribute to the work of these
mechanisms by providing alternative sources of information and by monitoring the implementation of
their recommendations.
The first two sections of this chapter examine mechanisms established within the United Nations human
rights system. A difference is traditionally made between the mechanisms established under the Human
Rights Council and applicable to all States (called Charter-based bodies) and mechanisms set up under
a specific treaty (called treaty-based bodies) that are applicable only to States that have ratified these
treaties. The mandate of the Committee against Torture will also be examined in detail. The third section
of this chapter examines regional complaints mechanisms, while the final section looks at the role of
visiting mechanisms which have specific mandates focusing on torture prevention.
1. United Nations treaty bodies29

Human rights treaty bodies are committees of independent experts that monitor the implementation
of international human rights treaties. They are created by the treaty that they monitor and their main
function is to consider the reports of States parties.
Some treaty bodies can examine individual complaints (a quasi-judicial function). However, this is usually
dependent on the State party accepting this provision of the treaty. The treaty body can issue its views
following the examination of a complaint, although this is not a legally binding decision.
While this section will examine in detail the role and function of the Committee against Torture, it is
important to note that the Human Rights Committee plays an important role in torture prevention. As
part of their torture prevention strategy, NHRIs should strive to cooperate closely with this body both in
the reporting procedure and its individual complaints procedure.
Examination Individual
Treaty Body Treaty
of reports complaints
First Optional
International Covenant on Civil and
Human Rights Committee Yes Protocol
Political Rights (1966)
(1966)
Optional
Committee on Economic, International Covenant on Economic,
Yes Protocol
Social and Cultural Rights Social and Cultural Rights (1966)
(2008)29
Committee on the International Convention on the

Elimination of Racial Elimination of All Forms of Racial Yes Article 14
Discrimination Discrimination (1965)
Committee on
Convention on the Elimination of All Optional
the Elimination of
Forms of Discrimination against Women Yes Protocol
Discrimination against
(1979) (1999)
Women
Convention against Torture and Other

Committee against Torture Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment Yes Article 22
(1984)
29 This protocol is not yet in force (February 2010).
Chapter 7: Cooperating with international mechanisms | 63

Examination Individual
Treaty Body Treaty
of reports complaints
Committee on the Rights Convention on the Rights of the Child

Yes No
of the Child (1989)
International Convention on the Rights

Committee on Migrant
of All Migrant Workers and Members of Yes30 Article 77
Workers
Their Families (1990)
Optional Protocol to the Convention

Subcommittee on
against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman No No
Prevention of Torture
and Degrading Treatment (2002)
Committee on the
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Optional
Rights of Persons with Yes
Disabilities (2006) Protocol
Disabilities
International Convention for the

Committee on Enforced
Protection of All Persons from Enforced Yes Article 31
Disappearances31
Disappearances (2006)
1.1. Role of NHRIs in the treaty body reporting procedure 30 31

Each treaty establishes a reporting procedure which requires States parties to regularly present a report
on their compliance with, and implementation of, their treaty obligations. Some treaty bodies have pre-
session meetings during which they adopt a list of questions that the State will be required to answer.
The report is then examined during a public session of the treaty body, in the presence of a delegation
of the State party, which considers all information provided by the State and information received from
other sources. Based on this process, treaty bodies adopt concluding observations, which refer to the
positive aspects of the State’s implementation and areas where they recommend the State to take
further action.
1.1.1. Pre-reporting procedure

NHRIs can play an important role in the pre-reporting process. In particular they can discuss the reporting
process with their Government and help ensure that the State’s report is submitted on time.
The Uganda Human Rights Commission included in previous annual reports a list of overdue
reports to United Nations treaty bodies. As this backlog was the result of a lack of Government
resources, the Commission, OHCHR and UNDP worked cooperatively with the authorities to
build their capacity to prepare the reports.
1.1.2. Reporting procedure

The role of NHRIs in the reporting procedure can differ from one treaty body to another. However, as a
minimum, NHRIs can:
• submit their own independent report on the State’s compliance with, and implementation of, the
treaty
• attend the session when the State reports to the treaty body.
30 The individual complaints procedure has not yet been accepted by a sufficient number of States Parties to make it operational
(February 2010).
31 This Committee has not yet been established (February 2010).

State reports and shadow reports

NHRIs may contribute information for inclusion in the State’s reports to treaty bodies. Increasingly treaty
bodies expect that NHRIs will be consulted in the preparation of reports by States parties. However,
NHRIs should refrain from preparing a report on behalf of the State, as it is crucial that they do not
compromise their standing as an independent, oversight body.
NHRIs can also draft an alternative report (known as a “shadow report”) and submit this directly to the
treaty body. NHRIs might also include comments on the report prepared by the Government, if there is
sufficient time to do so. State reports are supposed to be made public six weeks before the treaty body
meets.
A shadow report can follow the structure of the Convention, considering each article and highlighting
areas of progress or concern regarding implementation of its provisions by the State. It can also focus
on particular issues. However, the report should be balanced and consider both positive and negative
developments. If the Government has taken constructive steps towards the promotion and protection
of human rights, these should be acknowledged.
Shadow reports should also suggest questions and issues that the treaty body can raise in discussion
with the State, as well as propose recommendations that the treaty body could consider making to the
State in its concluding observations.
Other possible contribution

Some treaty bodies allow NHRIs additional opportunities to participate in the reporting process, such
as:
• holding a private meeting with the treaty body
The Office of the Public Defender (Ombudsman) of Georgia participated in a meeting

with the Human Rights Committee in November 2007.
• submitting information to assist with drafting the written list of issues sent to the State before the
session
Defensor de Pueblo de Bolivia submitted a report regarding the list of issues prior to a
session of the Committee on Migrants Workers in November 2007.
• making a statement during the plenary session
In August 2005, the Zambian National Human Rights Commission made an oral
presentation to the Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, a practice followed
by other NHRIs (Northern Ireland, 2005; South Africa, 2006; Republic of Korea and
New Zealand, 2007; Philippines, 2008). The recommendations proposed by the NHRIs
had significant influence on the development of concluding observations.
At a session of the Committee for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, the
Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission was allocated a specific time slot after the
NGO session and was provided with different seating arrangements from State and NGO
delegations.
1.1.3. Follow-up to the reporting procedure

NHRIs have a key role to play in the follow-up to the reporting process. They can translate, publish
and disseminate the concluding observations adopted by the treaty bodies. They can also encourage
the Government to implement the recommendations made by the treaty body, as well as monitor the
Government’s progress in this area.

In 2004, the German Institute of Human Rights organized a series of four follow-up conferences
with key national stakeholders to discuss the implementation of the concluding observations
adopted on Germany by four treaty bodies (Human Rights Committee, Committee against
Torture, Committee on the Rights of the Child and Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination
against Women).32 Minutes and recommendations adopted by the conferences were distributed
to key actors and to treaty bodies.
In 2006, the Canadian Human Rights Commission urged the Government to implement the
concluding observations of the Human Rights Committee and repeal a section from the Canadian
Human Rights Act.
1.2. Role of NHRIs and treaty body complaints procedure

1.2.1. Treaty bodies complaints procedure
Five Committees/treaty bodies33 can consider complaints from people who believe their rights have
been violated under the relevant treaty. Complaints may be brought only against States which have
recognized the competence of the Committee to consider complaints from individuals. Depending on
the treaty concerned, the State party recognizes the Committee’s competence by making a declaration
under an article of the treaty or by becoming a party to an Optional Protocol.
Anyone can lodge a complaint with a Committee against a State that satisfies these conditions. A
complaint may also be brought on behalf of another person if his or her consent is obtained or if
the author can justify acting without such consent. There is no formal time limit for filing a complaint.
However, it is preferable for complaints to be submitted as soon as possible after exhausting domestic
remedies. In urgent situations the committees may request through the State party to grant “interim
measures” to prevent “irreparable harm”. Such requests are normally issued to prevent actions that
cannot be undone, like the execution of a death sentence or the deportation of an individual facing risk
of torture.
Complaints are considered on the basis of the written information supplied by the complainant, or his
or her representative, and the State party in closed meetings. The committees’ decisions on individual
complaints are included in their annual reports. If a violation is found, the State is requested to provide
an effective remedy and respond to the Committee within a set deadline. The remedy recommended
will depend on the violations found. The State has a good faith obligation to implement the Committee’s
findings and grant appropriate remedies.
A member of each committee, called a Special Rapporteur, regularly reports to it on the implementation
of each decision and this is published in the committees’ reports. The Special Rapporteur encourages
the State to implement the decision of the Committee by issuing specific requests, writing regular
reminders for information, consulting with representatives of the State and, on occasion, visiting the
country concerned. The Human Rights Council also encourages States to implement the committees’
decisions through the universal periodic review.
Although some States do not comply with the decisions of committees, a significant number have
granted a variety of remedies to complainants following the decisions. Many have provided compensation,
released complainants from prison, reopened criminal cases, stopped the deportation of individuals,
granted residence permits, commuted death sentences and amended legislation and policies which
were held to contravene the treaties.
32 See: Examination of State Reporting by Human Rights Treaty Bodies: An Example of Follow-Up at the National Level by National
Human Rights Institutions by Frauke Seidensticker, German Institute for Human Rights (2005).
33 The Human Rights Committee, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, the Committee against Torture, the
Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, and the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
In the future, the Committee on Migrant Workers and the Committee on Enforced Disappearances may also consider individual
complaints.

2.1.2. Role of NHRIs in the treaty body complaints procedure

If the State has accepted the individual complaints procedure, NHRIs can raise public awareness about
this provision of the treaty and can consider assisting individuals to submit complaints. Depending on
their mandate, NHRIs may also be able to submit cases to treaty bodies on behalf of individuals.
They can disseminate decisions of treaty bodies concerning individual complaints, as well as follow-up
on these decisions and try to ensure that the Government implements them.
The conclusions of these treaty bodies also provide an important source of jurisprudence that can be
useful for the work of NHRIs.
In 2007, the Australian Human Rights Commission drew on jurisprudence of the Human
Rights Committee in its finding that 58 federal laws were in breach of Australia’s human rights
obligations.
Watch
engage effectively with the international human rights system on issues
concerning torture and ill-treatment.
Click on ‘Feature materials’ and then select ‘Item 9 – NHRIs: Working with
the international human rights system’.
1.3. NHRIs and the Committee against Torture

The Convention against Torture establishes the Committee against Torture, a body that monitors the
performance of States parties in meeting their obligations under the treaty. The Committee has a
broad mandate. Not only does it examine reports submitted by States parties, it can also carry out
confidential inquiries into allegations of systematic torture, examine individual complaints (where States
have accepted this procedure) and make general comments to help States, NHRIs and others interpret
and understand the treaty.
1.3.1. State reporting procedure

States parties have an obligation to submit a report to the Committee against Torture every four years,
setting out what steps they have taken to implement their obligations under the treaty. As with reports
prepared for other treaty bodies, NHRIs may be consulted in the preparation of the State party’s
report.
NHRIs can also submit their own shadow report to the Committee, as well as provide information for
the written list of issues sent to the State party prior to consideration of the report. The list of issues is
adopted one session prior to the session during which the Committee considers the State’s report.
The Committee’s website includes information on the participation of NHRIs (and NGOs) in the reporting
process.34
Since 2005, NHRIs that have submitted written information may also have a private meeting with the
Committee a day prior to the dialogue with the State delegation. These one-hour briefings provide
NHRIs with the opportunity to highlight and update the Committee on key issues.
34 See: www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cat/follow_up_ngo.htm.

NHRIs cannot intervene during the Committee’s examination of the State’s report and its dialogue with
the State delegation. However, as these meetings are public, NHRIs may attend as observers, even if
they have not submitted written information.
NHRIs can also play an important role by disseminating the Committee’s concluding observations to the
general public, as well as key stakeholders and relevant authorities. They can consider hosting follow-
up meetings to discuss the concluding observations and strategies to implement the recommendations
made by the Committee. NHRIs can also monitor and assist the State to implement the recommendations
made by the Committee.
The Committee adopted a follow-up procedure in 2003 which requires States parties to provide
information on the steps they have taken to implement its recommendations. NHRIs may also submit
written information to the Committee under this follow-up procedure.
In November 2008, the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights submitted a

report commenting on the Government’s initial report to Committee. Representatives from the
Commission also attended the session, which was noted in the concluding observations.
In May 2009, the New Zealand Human Rights Commission submitted a shadow report
and had a private meeting with the Committee prior to the dialogue session with the State
delegation.
Watch
Go to the Preventing Torture CD-Rom to watch Rosslyn Noonan, ICC Chair
and Chief Commissioner with the New Zealand Human Rights Commission,
discussing the importance of NHRIs engaging with the Committee against
Torture.
Click on ‘Feature materials’ and then select ‘Item 10 – Engaging with the
Committee against Torture’.
1.3.2. Committee’s inquiry procedure

The Committee against Torture can carry out a confidential inquiry into torture if it receives reliable
information that torture is being systematically practised in a certain country. Such an inquiry might
include a visit to the country concerned.
Although the report of the inquiry will be confidential, a summary of the inquiry report is provided in the
Committee’s annual report. In addition, the very fact that an investigation takes place can by itself have a
positive impact. A limited number of countries do not want the Committee to conduct such inquiries and
have therefore submitted a reservation to the relevant article – article 20 – when ratifying the Convention
against Torture.
Following the country visit, the Committee will determine whether or not the practice of torture
is systematic. The Committee has developed the following criteria to establish what is meant by
“systematic”:
• Torture is habitual, widespread and deliberate in at least a considerable part of the territory.
• This may or may not be the result of direct Government policy.
• Failure to enact laws preventing torture may also add to the systematic nature of torture.

Role of NHRIs regarding inquiry procedure

NHRIs can provide the Committee with reliable information about the systematic use of torture in the
country and also provide support to assist with its inquiries. Prior to and during the visit, NHRIs can meet
with the delegation and provide additional information, mindful of the confidential nature of the inquiry.
This information could include suggestions regarding places of detention to visit, allegations of torture
and issues that should be raised by the Committee with the State.
1.3.3. Individual complaints

It may be possible for the Committee against Torture to hear individual complaints if the relevant State
has accepted this procedure under article 22 of the Convention against Torture. If this is the case,
an individual can bring a complaint of torture or ill-treatment. Alternatively, the person’s relatives, a
designated representative or the NHRI can bring the complaint if the victim is unable to do so. There is
no time limit on making a complaint. However, the alleged violation must have taken place after the State
accepted the complaints procedure.
In addition to allegations of torture or ill-treatment, an individual may also complain if the State has
failed to meet its obligations under the Convention against Torture. The most serious complaints might
involve:
• a threat to expel someone to a country where they are in danger of torture

• a failure to promptly and effectively investigate an allegation of torture
• a failure to grant redress to a victim of torture
• use of a statement made as a result of torture in court proceedings.
The Committee will not investigate a complaint when:
• the State has not accepted the individual communications procedure

• the communication is anonymous
• the communication is “an abuse of the right of submission of such communications”
• the matter complained of is not covered under the Convention against Torture
• the same matter has been, or is being, examined by another international procedure
• domestic remedies have not been exhausted (domestic remedies might be considered to be
exhausted when procedures are unreasonably prolonged).
Role of NHRIs regarding individual complaints

NHRIs can lobby their States to accept the individual communications procedure under article 22 of
the Convention against Torture. If it has been accepted, NHRIs can raise public awareness about how
the procedure works and what is involved in making a complaint. They can also assist individuals to
submit complaints to the Committee, as well as follow-up the examination of complaints and monitor
the response of the State.
1.3.4. General comments

The Committee can adopt general comments to help States interpret their obligations under the
Convention. To date it has adopted general comments in relation to article 2 and article 3 of the
Convention.
NHRIs may be consulted on draft general comments and encouraged to submit their responses to the
Committee. They can also recommend that the Committee consider an issue where a general comment
is required or would be useful.

In 2007, the Committee wrote a letter to the ICC Chair requesting comments from NHRIs on the
draft general comment on article 2. A number of NHRIs reviewed the draft general comment and
submitted responses to the Committee.
2. Mechanisms under the United Nations Human Rights

Council
The Human Rights Council is a permanent United Nations body aimed at strengthening the promotion
and protection of human rights around the world. It was created in 2006 to replace the Commission on
Human Rights. The new Council has been given a clear mandate to undertake its work based on the
principles of universality, equality, non-selectivity and objectivity.
The Human Rights Council is composed of 47 Member States elected by the General Assembly through
secret ballot. The most important and innovative aspect of the Council is the universal periodic review, a
process which examines the human rights situation of all Member States on a regular basis. The Human
Rights Council also assumes the special procedures created under the former Commission on Human
Rights.
NHRIs that have been accredited as complying with the Paris Principles (“A status”) have been
recognized with the following participation rights in the Human Rights Council:
• separate accreditation status (different from States and from NGOs)

• the right to speak under all items of the Council’s agenda
• the right to make written statements for inclusion in the official record of meetings
• dedicated seating.
Image: APF / Ben Lee
2.1. Special procedures

The fact-finding and investigatory mechanisms of the Human Rights Council are collectively known as
the special procedures. These include Special Rapporteurs, Special Representatives of the Secretary-
General and working groups mandated by the Human Rights Council with the aim of documenting
human rights violations on particular themes or country situations.

The strength of these special procedures lies in their independence; mandate holders are human rights
experts appointed in an individual capacity.
The following special procedures are of particular relevance for the prevention of torture:
• Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
• Working Group on Arbitrary Detention
• Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances
• Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary detention
• Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of fundamental freedoms while countering
terrorism
• Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences
• Representative of the Secretary-General on the human rights of internally displaced persons
In relation to torture prevention, the most important of these special procedures is the Special Rapporteur
on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
2.1.1. Special Rapporteur on Torture

The Special Rapporteur on Torture is an independent expert who reports to the Human Rights Council
and to the General Assembly.
The role of the Special Rapporteur is to engage Governments in dialogue about credible allegations of
torture and to conduct fact-finding visits.
Dialogue
The dialogue that the Special Rapporteur establishes with Governments is based on two types of
communications.
• Urgent appeals request the Government to respond urgently to information that an individual
may be at risk of torture. This is a non-accusatory procedure, which generally requests the
Government to take certain steps to prevent possible incidents of torture without adopting a
position on the alleged risks.
• Letters of allegations bring to the attention of the Government cases of individuals or groups
alleging torture or ill-treatment. The Government is requested to clarify the substance of the
allegations and to forward information on the status of any investigation. Depending on the reply,
the Special Rapporteur may decide to conduct further inquiries or make recommendations.
It is important to note that, unlike other United Nations human rights mechanisms, it is not necessary
for a victim to exhaust all domestic remedies before submitting allegations of torture to the Special
Rapporteur.
The Special Rapporteur’s annual report, which is provided to the Human Rights Council and to the
General Assembly, includes an overview of all communications sent and received during the year. The
report may also examine key thematic issues – such as impunity, counter-terrorism measures, guarantees
for persons deprived of their liberty and non-refoulement – and propose recommendations.
Fact-finding visits
The Special Rapporteur does not have an automatic right to undertake a fact-finding visit to a country
(unlike the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture established under the Optional Protocol). Instead, the
Special Rapporteur can visit only following an invitation from a Government.


During the fact-finding visit, the Special Rapporteur will have contact with a wide range of stakeholders,
such as Government officials, NGOs, alleged victims and relatives, and can visit places of detention,
such as prison and police stations. The report of the fact-finding visit includes conclusions on the
country situation and makes recommendations to the Government.
Watch
Go to the Preventing Torture CD-Rom to watch Professor Manfred Nowak,
discussing his role as United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture.
Click on ‘Feature materials’ and then select ‘Item 8 – The role of the United
Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture’.
2.1.2. Contribution of NHRIs to the work of the Special Rapporteur on Torture

NHRIs are key dialogue partners for the Special Rapporteur. They can provide the Special Rapporteur
with reliable information, assist with preparations for a fact-finding visit, monitor implementation of
recommendations and undertake other follow-up action following a visit.
Providing information
NHRIs can provide an independent and credible source of information for the Special Rapporteur. They
can prepare information on individual cases or on the broader human rights situation that could form the
basis of the Special Rapporteur’s communications to the Government. They can also draw attention to
issues of concern in legislation or draft legislation.
In addition, NHRIs can suggest specific issues or topics to be the subject of a thematic study by the
Special Rapporteur.
Fact-finding visit
NHRIs can recommend that the Government invite the Special Rapporteur to undertake an official fact-
finding visit. In preparing for a country visit, the NHRI should provide a report of relevant information to
the Special Rapporteur, as well as propose suitable interlocutors.

During the visit, the Special Rapporteur will usually meet representatives of the NHRI. This provides an
important opportunity for the NHRI to present recent and updated information regarding torture and
other forms of ill-treatment in the country. It also allows the NHRI to advise the Special Rapporteur on
particular places of detention to visit.
Following up on reports and recommendations

As relay mechanisms at the country level, NHRIs have an important role to play in following-up on
the report issued by the Special Rapporteur following the fact-finding visit. NHRIs should translate, if
necessary, and widely disseminate the report to all key stakeholders. Importantly, they can also monitor
steps taken by the State to implement recommendations made by the Special Rapporteur.
NHRIs can organize follow-up seminars or roundtable discussions on the report and its recommendations,
as well as draw on the report when preparing advice, recommendations and reports to the Government,
Parliament or relevant authorities. It can also be a valuable resource for NHRIs when they prepare their
strategic work plan or formulate a national human rights action plan.
Finally, NHRIs can regularly communicate with the Special Rapporteur and provide information on
progress that has occurred in the implementation of recommendations from the report.
Following a 2006 visit to Paraguay, which included a meeting with the Ombudsman (Defensor
del Pueblo), the Special Rapporteur issued the following recommendation: “The Office of the
Ombudsman is encouraged to assume a more proactive role in the probe of torture allegations and
initiation of prosecutions of those responsible, as well as ensuring victims’ right to compensation.
The Special Rapporteur emphasizes the importance of the Office’s independence when it comes
to human rights protection, and calls upon all actors involved to comply with this requirement”
(A/HRC/7/3/Add.3).
2.2. Universal periodic review

2.2.1. The UPR procedure
The UPR is a new mechanism, in operation since 2008, which examines the human rights records of all
United Nations Member States once every four years.
The review is based on three types of information:
• a report submitted by the State, in writing and oral presentation

• a compilation of all United Nations and treaty body documents, comments and recommendations
regarding the State, which is prepared by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for
Human Rights (OHCHR)
• a summary of credible and reliable information provided by national stakeholders such as NHRIs,
NGOs, civil society groups and academic institutions, which is also prepared by OHCHR.
Each State is reviewed during a three-hour session of a working group of the Human Rights Council,
consisting of all 47 Member States of the Council. The review takes the form of an interactive dialogue
between the State delegation and the members of the Council, as well as any other State. The review
addresses a broad range of human rights topics and can include discussion of the State’s laws, policies
and practices in relation to torture and other forms of ill-treatment.
A report is then prepared by a troika of three Member States of the Council and discussed in a half-hour
session of the working group. The report of the working group is then adopted by the Human Rights
Council during its next session, following a one-hour discussion in a plenary meeting of the Council.

2.2.2. The role of NHRIs in the UPR

NHRIs have been recognized with a specific role in the UPR procedure. They provide an important
source of independent information on the country’s human rights situation, including the situation
regarding torture and ill-treatment of persons deprived of their liberty. It is therefore very important that
NHRIs make use of their opportunity to contribute to the UPR process.
Preparation for the review

Given their mandate, NHRIs are able to collect and compile independent, reliable and well-documented
information on the human rights situation in their country. This information can form the basis of their
report to the UPR.
The Human Rights Council has issued detailed guidelines regarding the structure and length of reports,
along with deadlines for their submission.35 NHRIs can, at the least, submit their latest annual report or
relevant thematic reports.
The documents submitted by NHRIs and other national stakeholders are available in full on the website
of the Human Rights Council and are summarized in a compiled format prepared by OHCHR. The report
can also be publicly presented at the national level in preparation of the review.
In addition, NHRIs can propose questions and issues that Member States might raise during the review
of the State, as well as suggest concrete recommendations that the UPR procedure could make to the
State.
Review of the State

The human rights situation is reviewed by the working group of the Human Rights Council, which takes
the form of an interactive dialogue with the State delegation. This dialogue is open only to Member and
Observer States of the Human Rights Council. NHRIs are not able to take part in the dialogue, although
they are able to attend the session as observers. This provides them with a further opportunity to lobby
Member States and propose questions and recommendations.
Adoption of the report

NHRIs can participate in the general debate on the report of each State review, which occurs during
the following session of the Human Rights Council. As NHRIs cannot contribute to the dialogue during
the review of the State, it is important that they make use of opportunity to contribute to the discussion
at this plenary session. In fact, many NHRIs are already engaging constructively in this forum to raise
issues and propose concrete recommendations.
Follow-up on recommendations
The role of NHRIs goes beyond participation in the UPR reporting and review process. As key national
stakeholders, they are uniquely placed to follow-up on the implementation of recommendations made by
the Human Rights Council. NHRIs can engage with the State and civil society on the most appropriate
and effective ways to monitor implementation and follow-up to the UPR procedure.
In addition, NHRIs are well placed to disseminate the outcome of the UPR process at the national level
by developing relevant education and awareness-raising programmes.
Azerbaijan participated in the UPR session held in February 2009. Prior to this, the Commissioner
for Human Rights (Ombudsman) initiated a series of awareness-raising activities in the country,
including meetings with relevant authorities and civil society and a one-day workshop, which
included expert participation from the Irish Human Rights Commission and the OHCHR Regional
35 See: www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPR/Pages/NgosNhris.aspx.

Coordinator for the South Caucasus. The Ombudsman also translated into Azeri all relevant
United Nations information material on the UPR process.
The Ombudsman prepared a report to the UPR, based on a broad and inclusive consultation
process. One-day meetings with all relevant stakeholders were organized in 2008, across each
of the country’s 54 districts. The Ombudsman report was prepared according to the OHCHR
guidelines and was referred to extensively in the summary document prepared by OHCHR.
During the review of Azerbaijan, 58 delegations made statements. The draft report adopted at
the end of the review included 32 recommendations. The final report was adopted by the Human
Rights Council in June 2009, with the Ombudsman attending the session. The Ombudsman’s
Office intends to translate the recommendations into Azeri and organize follow-up consultations
with the authorities on their implementation.
2.3. Human Rights Council complaint procedure

2.3.1. The complaint procedure
A new complaint procedure has been established under the Human Rights Council to address consistent
patterns of gross and reliably attested violations of all human rights, which occur in any part of the world
and under any circumstances.
Economic and Social Council resolution 1503 from 1970 provides the basis for the establishment of
this new procedure, which retains its confidential nature. It also requires a complainant to exhaust all
domestic remedies before lodging a complaint with the Human Rights Council. The complaint procedure
does not result in an individual judgement or an individual remedy, rather it aims instead to address
systemic patterns of human rights violation.
The complaint procedure establishes two distinct working groups: the Working Group on Communications
and the Working Group on Situations.
The Working Group on Communications, composed of five independent experts, is given the role to
assess the admissibility and the merits of communications it receives. All admissible communications
and recommendations are transmitted to the Working Group on Situations.
The Working Group on Situations is composed of five members appointed by regional groups from
Members States of the Human Rights Council. It presents the Council with a report on consistent
patterns of gross and reliably attested violations of human rights and makes recommendations on
the course of action to take. The Council examines reports of the Working Group on Situations in a
confidential manner and then takes a decision concerning each situation brought to its attention.
2.3.2. The contribution of NHRIs to the complaints procedure

NHRIs can raise awareness at the national level about the complaints procedure, how it works, possible
outcomes and the fact that it is a confidential process. NHRIs can also submit information when they
have evidence of consistent patterns of human rights violations, such as torture and ill-treatment.
3. Regional complaints mechanisms

Three regional systems for the protection of human rights – the European, African and Inter-American
systems – have adopted a two-body mechanism for the examination of individual complaints, consisting
of a Commission and a Court.
The Commissions are quasi-judicial bodies, with the power to issue decisions and recommendations. The
Courts have the power to issue legally enforceable judgments. Reforms to the European system in 1999
mean that complaints in this jurisdiction are now made directly to the European Court of Human Rights.

3.1. Overview of regional complaint mechanisms

3.1.1. The European system
Individual complaints are submitted directly to the European Court of Human Rights.
For the Court to consider a complaint:
• it must be covered by the European Convention

• domestic remedies must be exhausted (or unreasonably prolonged)
• it must be submitted within six months of a decision by domestic authorities
• it must not have been considered by another international complaints procedure.
3.1.2. The African system

The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights was set up to monitor compliance with the
African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. It can also examine individual or collective complaints.
For the Commission to consider a complaint:
• it must not be anonymous

• it must be covered by the African Charter
• it must not be based exclusively on reports in the mass media
• domestic remedies must be exhausted
• it must be submitted within a reasonable period of time once domestic remedies have been exhausted.
In 1998, a Protocol to establish an African Court of Human Rights was adopted. This came into force in
2004, but its functioning has been delayed by the decision to merge it with the African Court of Justice
of the African Union.
The Court will be able to examine complaints submitted by:
• the Commission
• the State party which has lodged a complaint to the Court
• the State party against which a complaint has been lodged
• the State party whose citizen is a victim of a human rights violation
• African intergovernmental organizations.
The African Court will also be able to examine complaints from NGOs and individuals if the State
concerned has made a declaration to accept this.
3.1.3. The Inter-American system

The Inter-American human rights system has two procedures: the Inter-American Commission on
Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.
Complaints to the Commission can be based on the American Convention on Human Rights or on
fundamental human rights standards, especially the American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of
Man. The latter would apply if the State involved in the complaint was not a party to the Convention.
In addition, the Commission has responsibility for monitoring adherence to the Inter-American Convention
to Prevent and Punish Torture.
Complaints can be referred to the Court only if:
• they concern a State party to the Convention, and

• the State party has accepted the jurisdiction of the Court.

3.2. The role of NHRIs in the regional complaint mechanisms

NHRIs can make use of regional complaints mechanisms in a number of ways. They can assist
individuals to submit complaints or they can file cases directly. They can also present amicus curiae
briefs. In addition, NHRIs can seek affiliated or accredited status before regional mechanisms to present
evidence and advocate their views.
In April 2008, the Irish Human Rights Commission, on behalf of the European Group of
NHRIs, submitted an amicus curiae brief to the European Court of Human Rights in the case
of DD v. Lithuania. This was the first such application before an international Court made by a
regional grouping of NHRIs.
Following on from this submission, the European Group of NHRIs developed a procedure for
monitoring cases before the European Court of Human Rights. Cases involving priority areas of
concern dealing with systemic human rights issues are now tracked and reviewed on a periodic
basis, helping identify strategic cases suitable for an amicus curiae intervention. Where a case
meets these criteria, the Irish Commission on Human Rights, as Chair of the regional group,
refers the case to the relevant NHRI of the respondent State, or to the European Group if no NHRI
exists in that country.
NHRIs also have a role to raise public awareness of the outcome of complaints at the national level and
to disseminate case law to legal and judicial stakeholders. In addition, NHRIs should closely monitor the
implementation of the decisions and judgements by the authorities.
The Guatemalan Ombudsman (Procurador de los Derechos Humanos) is assisting individuals

to bring cases to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.
4. Visiting mechanisms
Most international mechanisms are reactive and intervene only after torture or ill-treatment has already
occurred. Recently, however, mechanisms have been established that perform an important preventive
role, especially through a system of visits by independent experts to places of detention.
4.1. Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture

The Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture was adopted by the United Nations General
Assembly in December 2002 and came into force in June 2006.
The Optional Protocol establishes a system of regular visits to all places of detention undertaken by two
types of mechanisms:
• the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture

• “national preventive mechanisms” (NPMs) established in each State that has ratified the Optional
Protocol.
The Optional Protocol breaks new ground in the human rights system for three main reasons.
Firstly, the emphasis is placed firmly on prevention, through a proactive system of visits to place of
detention, rather than reacting once violations have occurred.
Secondly, it establishes a complementary approach between preventive efforts at the international

and the national level, creating an innovative “triangular” relationship between State authorities, the
Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and the NPM.
Finally, the approach is based on working cooperatively with States to prevent violations and to improve
the protection of persons deprived of their liberty, rather than on public condemnation. States are required

to enter into an ongoing dialogue with both the Subcommittee and the NPM on the implementation of
recommendations.
Given the importance of the Optional Protocol in the field of torture prevention, chapter 10 deals
specifically with the issue of NHRIs and the Optional Protocol. The following information provides some
introductory information about the Optional Protocol.
4.1.1. The Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture

The Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture is an expert body composed of 10 independent members,
although the number of members will increase to 25 in October 2010.36
The Subcommittee has a dual mandate to visit places of detention in States that have ratified the Optional
Protocol and to provide advice and assistance regarding the establishment of NPMs in those countries.
One of the innovative features of the Optional Protocol is that the Subcommittee can carry out country
visits and inspect places of detention without the prior authorization of the State.
During these visits, the Subcommittee will engage in dialogue with State authorities and with the NPM
with a view to strengthening the protection of persons deprived of their liberty from torture and ill-
treatment. Country visits also provide a unique opportunity for the Subcommittee to engage directly with
other relevant national actors, in particular NHRIs and civil society.
During the country visit, the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture will make unannounced visits to
particular places of detention. The aim is to analyse the root causes of torture and ill-treatment, identify
indicators that may point to possible future abuses and discuss possible safeguards.
Following the country visit, the Subcommittee will draft a report and prepare recommendations, which
are submitted in confidence to the Government. States can, however, authorize the publication of the
Subcommittee’s report. For instance, the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture visited the Maldives in
December 2007 and the Government made the Subcommittee’s report public immediately after receiving
it in February 2009. Sweden, which the Subcommittee visited in April 2008, authorized publication of the
report in July 2008, as well as publishing its reply to the Subcommittee (January 2009).
If a State fails to cooperate, the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture can ask the Committee against
Torture to make a public statement or to publish the report.
The Subcommittee also publishes an annual report, which is publicly available. In its first annual report,
adopted in 2008, the Subcommittee provided an overview of its activities and prepared “Preliminary
guidelines for the ongoing development of national preventative mechanisms”.
The Optional Protocol also provides for the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture to cooperate with
international and regional bodies in its work.
Watch
Chair of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture, discussing the
Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and the role of the
Subcommittee.
Click on ‘Feature materials’ and then select ‘Item 11 – The role of the
Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture.’
36 Article 5.1 of the Optional Protocol provides that the number of members of the Subcommittee increases to 25 following ratification
by 50 States parties. This occurred in September 2009 when Switzerland ratified the Optional Protocol.

4.1.2. National preventive mechanisms

A State that has ratified the Optional Protocol is required to designate or establish one or several national
preventive mechanisms (NPM). The Optional Protocol contains no specific requirement or guidance
regarding the structure of NPMs.
A State may therefore:
• set up an entirely new Optional Protocol-based mechanism

• designate an existing body (for example, the NHRI or ombudsman)
• designate several mechanisms, which can include existing or new bodies.
Chapter 10 provides a detailed analysis of some of the challenges faced by NHRIs that are designated
as a NPM.
NPMs have a mandate to conduct regular, unannounced visits to all places where persons are deprived
of their liberty. They can also present observations on draft or existing legislation relevant to the prevention
of torture. NPMs are also required to prepare an annual report of their activities, which should be made
public and disseminated by the authorities.
NPMs should be independent from the State and its authorities, both from a financial and a functional
point of view. The mandate of NPMs should be reflected in their composition. They should be gender-
balanced and include representatives of minority groups, as well as members from a variety of professional
backgrounds.
4.1.3. Powers to visit places of detention

For the first time in an international treaty, the Optional Protocol provides powers and guarantees for
NPMs and the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture to carry out visits to places of detention.
Under the Optional Protocol, both the Subcommittee and NPMs have the authority to visit any place
where persons are deprived of their liberty, such as:
• prisons
• police cells
• pretrial detention centres
• juvenile detention centres
• administrative detention centres
• military detention facilities
• detention centres for migrants and asylum-seekers
• temporary detention points in ports or airports
• border checkpoints
• medical institutions
• psychiatric institutions.
During these visits they are able to:
• interview any detainee in private

• interview any relevant officials
• interview family members of a detainee
• examine the records of all detainees
• examine documents, such as disciplinary rules and prison records
• inspect the entire premises of the place of detention.

4.2. Regional visiting bodies

4.2.1. The European Committee for the Prevention of Torture
The European Convention for the Prevention of Torture, adopted by the Council of Europe in 1987,
establishes the Committee for the Prevention of Torture.
The European Committee for the Prevention of Torture has a mandate to visit any place of detention in
all Member States of the Council of Europe. It can carry out two types of visits:
• periodic visits, which take place on a regular, five-year basis; the alphabetical list of countries to
be visited the following year is published at the end of the previous year
• ad hoc visits, which take place in response to a specific event and commonly occur at short
notice.
The European Committee can visit, at any time, any place where people are deprived of their liberty. This
includes places such as prisons and police cells, as well as psychiatric hospitals and homes for children
and older people. It can enter any institution that it chooses without restriction. It can communicate
freely and confidentially with people deprived of their liberty and with anyone else who may be able to
provide relevant information.
After its visit, the European Committee will prepare a report with recommendations, which is submitted
to the State for its response. Although this reporting process initially occurred confidentially, it has now
become accepted that States will authorize publication of the reports. It can also issue a public statement
if the Government does not cooperate (and has done so on five occasions).
In its general report of activities, the European Committee has also adopted a series of standards on
issues such as police custody, imprisonment, health care services in prisons, involuntary placement
in psychiatric establishments, young people deprived of their liberty, safeguards for irregular migrants
deprived of their liberty and combating impunity.
4.2.2. Visiting mechanisms in the Americas

The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights can carry out country visits to States parties to the
Inter-American Convention on Human Rights in order to investigate specific cases of human rights
violations.
In 2004, the Commission established the position of the Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Persons
Deprived of their Freedom, who has the right to carry out visits to places of detention “without prior
notice to prison authorities”.
The Special Rapporteur can also issue public reports and recommendations regarding a particular place
of detention, or a specific country or the region, as well as undertake follow-up visits.
4.2.3. The Special Rapporteur on Prisons and Conditions of Detention in Africa

This position was established by the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights in 1996.
The Special Rapporteur has the mandate to examine the state of prisons in Africa and to make
recommendations to improve conditions. An annual report of the Special Rapporteur’s activities is
prepared and presented to the Commission.
4.2.4. Contribution of NHRIs to regional visiting bodies

NHRIs can provide independent information regarding the situation of torture in their country on a regular
basis to visiting bodies, or in advance of a country visit when this is known. Regional bodies usually
meet with NHRIs during their visit. This provides an important opportunity to present recent information
and exchange views about particular needs and priorities regarding torture prevention. NHRIs are also

uniquely placed to follow-up on the implementation of recommendations made by visiting bodies,

provided the reports are published.
During its first periodic visit to Montenegro in September 2008, the Committee for the Prevention
of Torture held a meeting with the Human Rights and Freedoms Ombudsman of the
Republic of Montenegro.
During a visit to Ethiopia in 2004, the Special Rapporteur on Prisons and Conditions of Detention
in Africa met the Ethiopian Human Rights Commission, which also provided some logistical
assistance prior to the visit.

NHRIs can contribute to the effective work of international and regional bodies.
They can submit independent and credible information, participate in review
procedures and follow up on recommendations.
Interaction with the following mechanisms is important for the prevention of
torture and ill-treatment:
• United Nations Human Rights Council, in particular the universal periodic
review
• Treaty bodies, in particular the Committee against Torture
• Special procedures, in particular the United Nations Special Rapporteur
on Torture
• Regional complaints mechanisms
• Visiting mechanisms at the international level, such as the Subcommittee on
Prevention of Torture, and the regional level.
Further reading
In the CD-Rom
The Role of National Human Rights Institutions in the United Nations Treaty
Body Process; Marei Müller and Frauke Seidensticker, German Institute
for Human Rights; 2007
National Human Rights Institutions and the UN Human Rights Council;
ICC Position Paper Volume I (27 June 2006)
National Human Rights Institutions and the Special Procedures and
Universal Periodic Review Mechanism; ICC Position Paper Volume II
(22 September 2006)
Engagement of National Human Rights Institutions with the Universal
Periodic Review Mechanism; ICC Position Paper Volume III (Draft, March 2007)
Engagement of National Human Rights Institutions with the Special Procedures;
ICC Position Paper Volume IV (Draft, March 2007)
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme: A Handbook for Civil Society;
OHCHR; 2008

Chapter 8:
Monitoring places of detention
Key questions
• What is the difference between preventive and investigative monitoring?
• What steps should be taken to prepare for a visit to a place of detention?
• What are the different steps involved in carrying out a visit?
• What type of reporting is required following a visit?

Paris Principles
concerned or through the exercise of its power to hear a matter without higher
referral (…). These opinions, recommendations, proposals and reports, as well as any
prerogative of the national institution, shall relate to the following areas:
(ii) Any situation of violation of human rights which it decides to take up
(iv) Drawing the attention of the Government to situations in any part of the country
where human rights are violated and making proposals to it for initiatives to put an
end to such situations and where, necessary, expressing an opinion o the positions
and reactions of the government.
(b) To promote and ensure the harmonization of national legislation, regulations and
practices with the international instruments to which the State is Party and their
effective implementation.

Alternative measures to combat torture
NHRIs should work with the Governments to improve the current infrastructure of detention
facilities so as to ensure that human dignity is respected.
Monitoring
NHRIs should also take a proactive role in monitoring detention facilities. In order to facilitate
this role, NHRIs (and any other monitoring agencies) should have free and unfettered access
to all places of detention, the ability to interview persons in private and full access to all
relevant documentation. The monitoring team should be multi-disciplinary and include
lawyers and medical personnel.
82 | Chapter 8: Monitoring places of detention

Introduction
While the Paris Principles do not expressly mention “monitoring” as a key mandate of NHRIs, one of
their fundamental roles is to investigate violations of human rights, including those that occur in places
of detention.
NHRIs can monitor places of detention as part of an overall investigation strategy or as a specific
thematic activity.
In April 2004, the Consultative Council on Human Rights of Morocco (Conseil consultatif
des droits de l’homme) published a report on The Situation in Prisons, based on visits to 50
places of detention. The report provided a detailed analysis of all aspects of detention: material
conditions, staff, overcrowding, services provided, contacts with outside world, rehabilitation
programmes and activities and the treatment of detainees.
NHRIs can establish a regular programme to monitor places of detention, based on the goal of prevention
rather than investigation. Regular preventive visits to places of detention constitute one of the most effective
means of preventing torture and ill-treatment. Some NHRIs have already established a regular system
to monitor places of detention, while others have been designated as national preventive mechanisms
(NPMs) under the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture (read more in chapter 10).
The preventive nature of these visits distinguishes them in purpose and methodology from other types
of visits that NHRIs may conduct and, in particular, from visits to investigate or document individual
complaints made by detainees.
Characteristics of preventive visits

• Regular visits rather than one-off visits
These visits are part of a systematic and ongoing process, which means that visits to any given
place of detention will occur on a regular basis.
• Proactive rather than reactive

These visits take place before, rather than in response to, a specific event or a complaint from a
detainee. They can take place at any time, even when there is no apparent problem.37
• Global rather than individual

These visits do not attempt to respond to individual cases. Instead the focus is to analyse the
place of detention as a system and assess all aspects related to the deprivation of liberty. The
aim is to identify those aspects of detention which could lead to the torture or ill-treatment of
detainees or other forms of human rights violations.
• Based on cooperation rather than denunciation

The visits are part of an ongoing and constructive dialogue with the relevant authorities, providing
concrete recommendations to improve the detention system over the long term.
This chapter outlines a methodology for monitoring places of detention that can be applied by those
NHRIs that have the legal mandate to perform this role.
There are certain powers that NHRIs require in order to effectively undertake preventive monitoring of
detention facilities. These powers have been expressly set out, for the first time, in the Optional Protocol
and include:
• undertaking regular and unannounced visits to all places of detention

• access to all types of places where persons are deprived of their liberty
37 This does not prevent NHRIs from carrying out visits in response to specific events.
Chapter 8: Monitoring places of detention | 83

• access to all facilities within the place of detention

• access to all necessary records and information
• access to all persons deprived of their liberty and to any other person
• liberty to choose the persons to interview and the location where the interview is carried out
• the ability to interview detainees in private.
When some of these powers are not granted, NHRIs should carefully weigh up the advantages and
disadvantages of engaging in preventive monitoring activities. It is especially important that NHRIs are
given the authority to conduct interviews with detainees in private.
Basic principles of monitoring

• Do no harm
Persons deprived of their liberty are particularly vulnerable and their safety should always be a
primary consideration. Visiting teams should not take any action that could endanger an individual
or a group. Poorly planned visits – or visits that do not follow basic principles and methodology –
can potentially do more harm than good.
• Respect the authorities and persons deprived of their liberty

Visiting teams should always respect the role and functions of the detaining authorities. Establishing
mutual respect with the staff and management of the detention centre is the basis for building a
constructive relationship and effective working practices. Detainees should also be treated with
respect and courtesy.
• Respect confidentiality
It is critical that all members of the visiting team, including interpreters, respect the confidentiality
of information provided by detainees during private interviews. No information should be released
without the express consent of the detainee.
• Respect security
There are three aspects to the issue of security. Firstly, the visiting team should respect the security
requirements of the facility and conform to internal rules. Secondly, the security of detainees –
which is closely linked to the issue of confidentiality – should be a priority. Finally, members of the
visiting team must address the issue of their own security. The issue of personal safety may be
raised by the authorities as a reason to not allow access to specific parts of a facility or to conduct
interviews with certain detainees. It is ultimately the responsibility of each member of the visiting
team to determine how they respond to this advice.
• Be objective and credible

Visiting teams must strive to record available and observable facts and to engage with both staff
and detainees in an independent and impartial way. Visitors should also be perceived as being
impartial. The mandate of the visiting team – both what it can and cannot do – should be clearly
explained to staff and detainees and no promises or undertakings should be made that cannot
be kept.
• Be consistent and persistent

The legitimacy and credibility of the NHRI monitoring function will be established over time. This
requires consistency, continuity and patience. The same methodology should be used consistently
during its regular programme of visits to all places of detention.

1. Before the visit

1.1. Negotiating access
Most NHRIs have some access to places of detention as part of their general mandate. When this is
not the case, the NHRI will need to negotiate access directly with the relevant authorities. The best way
of ensuring long-term access to places of detention is to establish a memorandum of understanding
with the relevant ministries or government departments (usually the Ministry of Interior and the Ministry
of Justice, although it may also extend to ministries of health, immigration, social care and others). The
memorandum of understanding should explicitly guarantee the NHRI the powers it needs for effective
monitoring (see above). In particular, it should include the guarantee of unrestricted access at any time
and the ability to conduct interviews in private with detainees selected by the visiting team.
1.2. Establishing a monitoring programme

In establishing a monitoring programme, NHRIs should first prepare a list all types of places of detention
that should be visited. The list should include the type of facility (prison, pretrial detention facility, etc.), its
holding capacity (official and actual) and its location. Ideally, NHRIs should visit all places where people
are, or may be, deprived of their liberty: prisons, police stations, mental health institutions, juvenile
detention facilities, military facilities, immigration detention centres and others.
After compiling this initial list, NHRIs then need to select the places of detention that they intend to visit.
This could include:
• a cross-section of different categories of facilities by region or at the national level

• a selection of places based on certain criteria, such as:
- complaints received (or lack of complaints)
- high levels of risks (those with vulnerable populations or known places of interrogation)
- remote locations.
As part of its 2004 report assessing the situation in prisons, the Consultative Council on
Human Rights of Morocco established the following criteria to select the prisons that it would
visit:
• recently built prisons

• prisons not visited since 1996
• severely overcrowded prisons
• prisons in remote locations
• two large capacity prisons
• one prison that had experienced a fire.
The programme of visits will also depend on the type and length of the visits that the NHRI intends to
conduct. Ideally NHRIs should undertake a combination of in-depth visits, that last several days and
analyse all aspects of conditions and treatment in a facility, as well as short, unannounced visits that
provide a general overview of the detention situation.
As part of a regular monitoring programme, it is important to determine how regularly different places
of detention will be visited. Ideally, places of detention should be visited once a year and those facilities
that present higher risks should be visited more frequently.

1.3. Developing practical tools

NHRIs may decide to develop practical tools to assist them undertake visits, such as checklists or
questionnaires for interviews. These tools can help ensure that a consistent approach is used during
each visit to places of detention, especially when there are different visiting teams from the NHRI. They
should, however, provide a general guide for the visit, rather than setting out a format to be strictly
followed. Monitoring places of detention requires the ability to adapt to a variety of situations and to
respond to the specific circumstances of particular detention facilities.
The Philippines Commission on Human Rights caries out regular visits to all prisons in order
to assess conditions against national and international human rights standards for the treatment
of prisoners and detainees. The Commission has developed a set of guidelines for detention
monitoring in order to standardize their inspection procedure.
1.4. Preparing for the visit

It is crucial that NHRIs set aside adequate time to prepare for the visit, as this ensures that the visiting
team can make greatest use of the time they spend in the detention facility.
1.4.1. Defining the objective of the visit

During the initial visit to a place of detention, the goal of the NHRI should be to gain an overview of the
conditions of detention and the treatment of detainees in the facility, as well as to collect information on
the most pressing problems.
During following visits, the visiting team may decide to concentrate on specific aspects of the detention
facility, such as its complaint system, its disciplinary procedures, medical care or violence between
prisoners.

1.4.2. Establishing the visiting team and organizing the work

In setting up the visiting team, NHRIs should consider:
• the type of expertise needed, based on the objectives of the visit and the type of facility being
visited (participation of a medical doctor is often useful)
• gender balance
• the size of the visiting team (generally between two and eight persons)
• identifying a team leader
• the division of tasks between team members and ensuring each person understands their specific
responsibilities during the course of the visit.
In 2007, the National Human Rights Commission of Korea monitored six detention centres
and two juvenile detention centres. The visits were undertaken by monitoring teams that included
a Commissioner, medical doctors, lawyers, NGO representatives and investigators from the
Commission.
1.4.3. Collecting available information

Before a visit, the visiting team should seek to compile and review all available information about the
particular place of detention, such as:
• reports from other organizations

• media reports
• the number and type of complaints received by the NHRI or other complaint handling bodies (the
absence of complaints can also be revealing).
It is important to make sure that all team members share and review this information before undertaking
the visit.
1.4.4. Establishing prior contacts

Before the visit, the NHRI should consider contacting other groups or individuals who have information
to share about the particular place of detention, such as NGOs, family members of detainees, lawyers
and those released from detention.
The NHRI may also choose to announce a visit in advance. While NHRIs are mandated to carry out
unannounced visits to places of detention, there are some situations where announcing a visit in advance
may be beneficial (for example, to ensure the presence of the prison governor).
2. Undertaking a visit
In order to properly evaluate the conditions of detention and the treatment of detainees, NHRIs need to
cross-check different sources of information (a process known as “triangulation”), including:
• information from the authorities and other sources

• information from persons deprived of their liberty
• the observations of the visiting team.
2.1. Conducting the visit

A preventive visit to a place of detention should contain the following steps:
• an initial talk with the person in charge of the facility

• a tour of the premises

• consultation of registers
• interviews with detainees in private
• a final talk with the person in charge.
2.1.1. Initial talk with the person in charge

The visit usually begins with an initial talk with the person in charge of the facility, or if s/he is not present,
the person next in charge.
This discussion is an important first step in establishing a constructive dialogue with the authorities and
also provides an opportunity to:
• introduce the mandate of the NHRI and the visiting team

• explain the objectives of the visit
• explain the working method for the visit, in particular the need to hold interviews in private with
selected detainees
• explain how information collected during the visit will be used
• ask for recent and specific information
• ask the person in charge of the facility for their opinion about the challenges they encounter in
their work and possible solutions.
Watch
Go to the Preventing Torture CD-Rom to watch a role play that highlights
good practice approaches when holding an initial conversation with the
person in charge of a place of detention prior to conducting a preventive
visit.
Click on ‘Feature materials’ and then select ‘Item 12 – Role play: Initial
conversation with person in charge of a place of detention’.
2.1.2. Tour of the premises

After the initial talk, the visiting team should undertake a tour of the premises. A short introductory tour
of the entire facility helps to provide a sense of the overall design and layout of the centre, as well as
the location of different facilities used by the detainees. It also enables the visiting team to gain a first
impression of the atmosphere of the place.
Following the general tour, the visiting team can break into smaller groups to more thoroughly inspect
specific areas of the centre, such as the kitchen, the infirmary, disciplinary cells, dormitories and sanitary
facilities.
2.1.3. Consultation of registers

One or more members of the team should consult the registers and other documents held on file. This
consultation is best done at the beginning of the visit, as information obtained from the registers can
be verified, if necessary, during the course of the visit and during interviews with detainees. There are
a number of different registers kept in places of detention but, in the context of preventing torture and
ill-treatment, registers of incidents and registers of disciplinary measures are of particular importance.
Other documents – such as internal rules, staff lists and working schedules – are also important and
provide an understanding of how the centre functions.

2.1.4. Interviewing detainees

The most important part of any visit is the time spent talking in private with detainees and hearing directly
about their treatment and their experience of the conditions in detention.
The interview process is a delicate exercise which aims to establish a relationship of trust between
the interviewer and the detainee (see chapter 5 for more information on preparing for and conducting
interviews).
The visiting team, and not the authorities, must select the detainees who will be interviewed. Ideally,
in order to have a representative sample of detainees in the centre, a significant number of interviews
should be conducted (for example, ten per cent of all detainees).
The visiting team may decide to select a random sample of detainees based on the register (for example,
every tenth person listed). Alternatively, the team might decide to select a representative sample of
detainees based on previous information or a specific situation (for example, recently-arrived detainees
or detainees held under disciplinary sanctions).
A combination of both random and critical selection helps ensure that an appropriate cross-section of
detainees are interviewed and can contribute information to the preventive monitoring process. The
visiting team should make sure that they do not speak only with those detainees who seek to make
contact with them.
Ensuring the confidentiality of the interview is essential. The interview should be held out of hearing, and
preferably out of sight, of staff and other detainees. The choice of location for the interview is also crucial,
both for confidentiality and to build trust. Any location that would equate the visitor with detention centre
staff, such as administrative offices, should be avoided.
Conducting individual interviews can be a time-consuming process. In order to optimize the time
available to the visiting team, it may be useful to hold a combination of individual interviews and group
discussions with detainees.
Group discussions enable the visiting team to have contact with more detainees and are useful to hear
about common concerns, get a sense of the mood or culture within the place and identify individual
detainees to interview in private. However, as there is no confidentiality, group interviews exclude the
possibility of discussing more sensitive issues. It is important to ensure that there is no disclosure during
group discussions of any information that may pose a risk of harm to an individual.
2.1.5. Discussions with staff

In addition to talking with the person in charge of the facility, it is also important for the visiting team to
speak with different members of staff. Although it might be difficult to carry out interviews in private, in
particular with security staff, the visiting delegation should try to talk with a representative selection of
staff. Other staff, members, such as medical doctors and social workers, should also be interviewed.
Staff members can all contribute very important information. They can raise issues for further investigation,
as well as contribute their own suggestions or opinions about problems within the place. Talking with
staff is also important in order to cross-check information or allegations received from other sources.
Finally, any opportunity during the visit to engage in conversation with staff and detainees, including
informal talks, should be taken.
2.1.6. Final talk with the person in charge

It is important to formally end the visit with a talk with the person in charge of the facility. This should be
arranged beforehand and the visiting team should set aside some time to debrief and share their findings
prior to this meeting. The aim of the final talk is to provide a summary of facts found and specific issues
identified. Urgent cases should be raised immediately, although it may be wise to address very serious

cases directly to more senior officials. The final talk should also mention the steps that will follow the visit,
including the preparation of a written report of the visit which will be sent to the relevant authorities.
The Ombudsman of Peru (Defensoría del Pueblo) conducts regular, unannounced visits to the 1,000
police stations and 84 prisons in the country. Some police stations, such as those in areas with a high
crime rate and where many complaints were received, are visited more frequently than others. These
visits are sometimes carried out at night or on the weekend. In addition, the Ombudsman may also carry
out visits to military bases, mental health institutions and centres of administrative detention.
Watch
Go to the Preventing Torture CD-Rom to watch Dr Silvia Casale, former
President of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and former
Chair of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture, discussing the steps
involved in undertaking an effective preventive visit to a place of detention.
Click on ‘Feature materials’ and then select ‘Item 13 – Undertaking a
preventive visit to a place of detention’.
3. After the visit

3.1. Reporting
The visit is not an end in itself but rather the first step in a long-term process of improving the treatment
of detainees and the conditions of detention. Visits should be followed by credible reports addressed to
the relevant authorities, which include practical recommendations for change.
3.1.1. Internal reporting

NHRIs should develop a standard reporting format for visits to places of detention. These notes provide
a clear, fact-based account of the visit and contribute to the development of institutional knowledge.
They are particularly important when NHRIs plan thematic reports that cover several visits.
3.1.2. Visit report

Visit reports are usually confidential and addressed to the person in charge of the facility visited. They
should be prepared shortly after the visit and not be unnecessarily long. A good report will be structured
thematically and, when discussing areas of concern, include the facts found, an analysis of the problem
and the proposed recommendations.
Visit reports can also be sent to the higher authorities (such as the relevant government department or
ministry) and eventually made public. When reports are made public, they should be easily accessible
and widely disseminated.
It is important to ensure that the reports do not disclose confidential information or any information that
may result in a risk of harm to the person who provided the information.
3.1.3. Thematic reports

In addition to their reports on specific visits, NHRIs can also prepare thematic reports that consider
specific issues (for instance, medical services or police violence) over a certain period of time and
across different types of places of detention. This approach provides a more analytical view that can
help identify patterns of problems and highlight contributing factors in different places. They should also

include practical recommendations to bring about systemic change. Thematic reports should initially be
sent to the relevant authorities for comment and then made public and widely disseminated through
the media.
In 2008, the Australian Human Rights Commission published a report on issues related to
immigration detention. It provides a summary of observations following visits to the country’s nine
immigration detention facilities and interviews with people in community detention.
3.2. Drafting good recommendations

The quality and usefulness of recommendations developed following visits to places of detention should
be assessed against the following ten interrelated and mutually reinforcing criteria (the double SMART
model).
Specific: each recommendation should address only one specific issue

Measurable: the evaluation of the implementation should be as easy as possible
Achievable: each recommendation should be realistic and feasible
Results-oriented: the actions suggested should lead to a concrete result
Time-bound: it should mention a realistic timeframe
AND
Solution-suggestive: Wherever possible, recommendations should propose credible

solutions
Mindful of prioritization, sequencing and risks: it might be useful to address more urgent
recommendations first and reserve others for subsequent reports.
Argued: recommendations should be based on high-quality, objective evidence and analysis
and refer to standards
Real-cause responsive: recommendations should address the cause of the problem, rather
than the symptoms
Targeted: recommendations should be directed to specific institutions/actors rather than to
“the authorities”
In practice, it might be difficult to draft recommendations that comply with all the double SMART criteria,
however, NHRIs should take sufficient time to consider them carefully. Drafting good recommendations
is essential as it provides a solid basis for an ongoing dialogue with the authorities and enables NHRIs
to follow-up on their implementation.
3.3. Annual report

NHRIs are usually required to present an annual report of their activities to the Parliament. Annual
reports provide an opportunity for the NHRI to summarize its key human rights concerns and present
recommendations that require legislative intervention. Among other issues, an annual report can draw
attention to concerns regarding the treatment of detainees and conditions of detention. The annual
report should made available to the media and, more broadly, to the general public.
The Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission has the mandate to monitor on
a monthly basis places such as police custodials, detention centres and jails. The visiting team
examines the overall conditions of detention and the treatment of persons deprived of liberty,
as well as conducting face-to-face interviews in private with those detainees wishing to make a
complaint.

Watch
role to monitor places of detention.
Click on ‘Feature materials’ and then select ‘Item 14 – NHRIs: Monitoring
places of detention’.

• Monitoring places of detention through regular visits should respect basic
principles, in particular the principle to “do no harm”.
• Visits to places of detention should be well planned in terms of reviewing
available information, dividing tasks between team members and making
prior contacts.
• Key steps involved in conducting a visit include: initial talk with the
person in charge, tour of the premises, consultation of registers, private
interviews with detainees, final talk with the person in charge.
• Reporting on visits and preparing recommendations is crucial as a follow-up
mechanism and for establishing an ongoing dialogue with the relevant authorities.
Further reading
In the CD-Rom
Making Standards Work: An International Handbook on Good Prison Practice;
Penal Reform International; 2001
Monitoring Places of Detention: A Practical Guide; Association for the Prevention
of Torture; 2004
Detention Monitoring Briefing No. 1: Making Effective Recommendations;
Detention Monitoring Briefing No. 2: The Selection of Persons to Interview
in the Context of Preventive Detention Monitoring; Association for the
Prevention of Torture; 2009
Detention Monitoring Briefing No. 3: Using Interpreters in Detention
Monitoring; Association for the Prevention of Torture; 2009
Visiting places of detention: What role for physicians and other health professionals?;
Training Manual on Human Rights Monitoring (see Chapter IX: Visits to Persons in
Detention and Chapter XX: Reporting); Professional Training Series No. 7; OHCHR; 2001

Chapter 9:
Promoting public awareness
Key questions
• How can NHRIs engage in effective public education on torture
prevention?
• What activities can help build public awareness on torture prevention?
• What are the advantages of initiating awareness raising activities for
persons deprived of their liberty?

Paris Principles
g) To publicize human rights (…), by increasing public awareness,
especially through information and education and by making use of
all press organs.
Introduction
Promoting community awareness of, and respect for, human rights is one of the core functions of NHRIs.
This makes them ideally placed to initiate public education programmes that promote awareness of the
prohibition of torture and build community support for the prevention of torture.
Public education programmes and awareness-raising campaigns are important because they can
influence stakeholders and decision makers and contribute to community-wide attitudinal change.
Awareness-raising activities usually have more impact when they are conducted in partnership with
others, in particular with civil society, community leaders or other relevant groups. The media are
also a crucial partner. Networking and close consultation with these different partners is an important
component of any successful public awareness programme.
1. Public education
It is obvious that people need to understand what rights they have in order to ensure that those rights
are respected by the authorities. However, those who are most vulnerable to torture and ill treatment
– for instance, people who are poor, have low education or belong to minority groups – are also those
who are least likely to have a proper understanding of their rights.
There is a clear need to ensure that people of all backgrounds know their rights. When people are aware
of the obligations that the Government and other authorities have to them, and when those obligations
are not met, they can be held to account.
Chapter 9: Promoting public awareness | 93

When planning a public education programme, NHRIs should define a specific objective and the group
or groups they intend to reach. For example, a targeted campaign might have a goal of helping homeless
young people know their rights if they are arrested by the police.
These education initiatives are generally most effective when they are conducted in partnership with
others working in the field. Therefore NHRIs should consider building networks with a wide range
of groups and professionals, such as social workers, charity organizations, human rights NGOs or
professional associations of doctors and lawyers.
Once the objective for the education programme has been defined, the next step is to consider the
best way to communicate with the target group. This will obviously vary considerably, depending on the
group.
If, for instance, the programme aims to reach homeless young people, it could include strategies such
as:
• placing leaflets or posters in key places, including police stations or youth centres
• running street theatre sessions
• distributing caps, T-shirts or pocket cards
• establishing and promoting a free information hotline
• holding information sessions in youth centres, accommodation centres or other places where
young people gather.
2. Public awareness campaigns

As part of their mandate to promote human rights, NHRIs should seek to raise awareness among the
general public about the absolute prohibition on torture and the right of all persons, in particular those
deprived of their liberty, not to be tortured or ill-treated.38
Torture and ill-treatment almost always occurs out of public view. As a result, these issues may be rarely
discussed in the media or other public settings and there may be little awareness that such practices
occur. NHRIs can play an important role in bringing the issue of torture out of the shadows and into
the public domain. Public awareness and community support can be a crucial factor in bringing about
changes to laws, policies and practices.
In most countries around the world, community attitudes to detainees can vary from indifference to
suspicion and even antipathy. These feelings are usually reinforced by public discourse on issues of
security and law and order that can legitimate poor treatment of detainees. Similarly, public opinion can
sometimes view certain forms of violent behaviour, for example during interrogation, as an acceptable
part of police work. This perception can be reinforced by television programmes that show police
violence as a normal, or even necessary, part of policing.
This is why it is important for NHRIs to regularly communicate the message that torture is never
acceptable and that all persons deprived of their liberty deserve humane treatment. One of the best
ways to address the community at large is through global public awareness campaigns that engage
journalists and opinion leaders.
An effective public education campaign will be based on an agreed communication strategy, which will
include a specific objective, a clear and simple message, the main methods of communication and the
timeframe for the campaign.
38 In its general comment No. 20, the Human Rights Committee asks to “be informed how States parties disseminate, to the
population at large, relevant information concerning the ban on torture and the treatment prohibited by article 7” (para. 10). The
Committee against Torture also notes that “it is important that the general population be educated on the history, scope and
necessity of the non-derogable prohibition of torture and ill-treatment” (general comment No. 2, para. 25).
94 | Chapter 9: Promoting public awareness

Some avenues that NHRIs can use to communicate with the general public include:
• holding a major press conference to encourage news reporting on the issue

• mobilizing leading public figures in support of the campaign, which could also include testimonies
of victims
• preparing opinion editorials and Letters to the Editor
• developing community awareness spots for radio and television
• placing advertisements in major newspapers
• incorporating the issue into popular television drama series or radio programmes
• distributing posters and leaflets
• organizing a public petition.
It is important to select an appropriate time to launch the campaign. One option is to use the momentum
created by various international days, such as
• International Day in Support of Victims of Torture; 26 June

• Human Rights Day; 10 December
• World AIDS Day (for a campaign on issues related to HIV/AIDS in prisons); 1 December.
To celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, OHCHR launched
the Dignity and Justice for Detainees Week, on 6–12 October 2008. The Uganda Human Rights
Commission used the occasion to implement a wide range of activities.
The Commission launched the week with a public procession through the capital, Kampala,
attracting over 200 marchers from civil society organizations, the police, prison officials,
government ministries, Commission staff, students, academics, journalists and the public. The
procession drew attention to the rights of detainees and, at the end of the six-kilometre march,
speeches were made by a representative of the Chief Justice and representatives from the
Commission and NGOs.
During the week, the Commission organized a Round Table Stakeholders Meeting on the
promotion and protection of the rights of inmates. The meeting brought together 60 participants
from civil society, the prison services, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Parliament and received
significant coverage in the print and electronic media.
Watch
Go to the Preventing Torture CD-Rom to watch Graeme Innes, from the
Australian Human Rights Commission, discussing how NHRIs can engage
the media to promote awareness and action on human rights issues.
Click on ‘Feature materials’ and then select ‘Item 15 – Promoting public
awareness’.
3. Raising awareness among persons deprived of

their liberty
NHRIs can also consider running education programmes that provide information to persons deprived
of their liberty and those who are most at risk of torture or ill-treatment.
Chapter 9: Promoting public awareness | 95

This could include information about existing guarantees and procedures, as well as rights during arrest,
interrogation and in detention. It may also include information about contacting the NHRI or making a
complaint.
This information could be distributed through:
• leaflets or booklets on the rights of prisoners

• pocket cards on the rights of inmates
• posters displayed in police stations and prisons
In Sierra Leone, the Human Rights Commission published and distributed a pocket book on
the rights of prisoners.
The Ombudsman in Peru (Defensoría del Pueblo) launched a poster campaign on the rights of
detainees with the slogan “Defend your rights – Detention only affects your liberty”.

• Educating the general public about the prohibition and prevention of
torture is an important preventive action.
• Public education campaigns can help raise awareness about the issue and
provide important momentum for change.
• Awareness-raising activities can also focus on persons deprived of liberty
and those who are most at risk of torture and ill-treatment.
Further reading
In the CD-Rom
Media Communications Toolkit; Institute for Media, Policy and Civil Society;
2001
Developing Effective Media Communication Skills; Institute for Media, Policy
and Civil Society; 2001
96 | Chapter 9: Promoting public awareness

Section IV
Cross-cutting actions
Chapter 10: NHRIs and the Optional Protocol

to the Convention against Torture
97
Chapter 10:
NHRIs and the Optional Protocol
to the Convention against Torture
Key questions
• How can NHRIs promote ratification of the Optional Protocol to the
Convention against Torture, as well as open debate on the options for a
national preventive mechanism?
• What are the challenges for NHRIs in being designated as a national
preventive mechanism?
• How can NHRIs not designated as a national preventive mechanism
cooperate with the Optional Protocol’s bodies?
1. Introduction
The Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture aims to prevent torture and ill-treatment
by establishing a system of regular visits to places of detention. These visits are undertaken by an
international body, the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture, and by a national preventive mechanism
(NPM). The Optional Protocol represents an important new instrument for the prevention of torture and
offers several different roles that NHRIs can play (see chapter 7 for more information)
2. Promoting the Optional Protocol

2.1. Role of NHRIs in the ratification of the Optional Protocol
As part of their general mandate to promote ratification of international instruments, NHRIs can be
actively involved in promoting ratification of the Optional Protocol. This can be done through formal
recommendations to the Government, discussing the importance of the Optional Protocol in its annual
or thematic reports, lobbying relevant Government Ministers and Members of Parliament and raising
awareness and building support with different stakeholders and the public.
The National Human Rights Commission of Korea submitted several recommendations to

the Government on signing and ratifying the Optional Protocol. In November 2006, it held a
symposium on Ratification of the Optional Protocol and its Impact on the Human Rights of the
Detainees.
At the initiative of the South African Human Rights Commission, an ad hoc Committee on
Torture with a mandate to lobby for the ratification of the Optional Protocol was established. It is
composed of representatives from the Government, Parliament, civil society organizations and
existing visiting bodies.
When discussing ratification of the Optional Protocol, consideration should also be given to the practical
steps involved in implementing the treaty and, in particular, the possible options for establishing or
designating a NPM.
98 | Chapter 10: NHRIs and the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture
Part II Preventing torture: NHRIs in action | Section IV Cross-cutting actions
2.2. Consultation process regarding possible NPM

Under the Optional Protocol, NPMs have a mandate to carry out regular preventive visits to all places
where persons are deprived of their liberty. They are also required to make recommendations to
the authorities on the prevention of torture and to submit observations on relevant existing or draft
legislation.
In order for them to perform this mandate, States parties must guarantee NPMs functional independence,
as well as the independence of their members. They must also make available the necessary resources
for the effective functioning of the NPM. They must ensure that NPM members have the required
capabilities and professional knowledge to perform the role. In addition, NPMs must be granted certain
powers regarding access to places of detention, access to information and access to persons deprived
of their liberty.
The Optional Protocol does not prescribe any particular organizational form for NPMs. States are able
to decide the most suitable option, taking into account their national, social, political and economical
context. It is incumbent on States to thoroughly analyse and assess the various options available to
them.
This analysis should be undertaken in an open and transparent manner. In its first annual report, the
Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture developed “preliminary guidelines for the ongoing development
of national preventive mechanisms” which recommended that these bodies should be established by a
public, inclusive and transparent process.
NHRIs should be part of this consultation process, together with other national actors, such as relevant
Government officials, existing monitoring bodies, human rights NGOs, trade unions, professional
organizations and Members of Parliament.
Ideally, the consultation process should start with an inventory of existing visiting bodies within the
country, including a detailed analysis of their ability to meet the Optional Protocol’s requirements. This
inventory can provide a useful starting point for developing recommendations on possible options for
the NPM.
Based on this analysis, and on the consultation process, States can then decide their preferred model
for the NPM. This could include:
• the establishment of an entirely new Optional Protocol-based mechanism

• the designation of an existing body
• the designation of several mechanisms, either existing bodies, new bodies or a combination of
both.
In Paraguay, following the State’s ratification of the Optional Protocol, a three-day national
seminar was held that brought together hundreds of representatives from the governmental
and non-governmental sectors. At the end of the forum, a 13-member NPM drafting committee
was established by consensus, comprising government and civil society representatives. After
six months of consultations, a draft law to create the National Commission to Prevent Torture
was presented to the Congress. In its second annual report, the Subcommittee on Prevention of
Torture “noted with appreciation that the process of development of the draft law establishing the
NPM has been characterized by openness, transparency and inclusivity” (CAT/C/42/2, para. 38).
In May 2008, the Attorney General’s Office of Australia invited stakeholders to share their views
on whether Australia should accede to the Optional Protocol. During the consultation process
(known as the National Interest Analysis), several institutions, including the Australian Human
Rights Commission, presented their positions. These written submissions will serve as a basis
for further discussions on the most appropriate NPM option in Australia.
Chapter 10: NHRIs and the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture | 99
2.3. Consideration of NHRIs as NPM

When there is an independent NHRI operating in the country, designating the NHRI as the NPM is an
option available to the Government. Its independence, existing mandate and functioning, as well as the
level of credibility and legitimacy it has established with the authorities and the broader society, should
be carefully examined.
Existing NHRIs do not necessarily meet all the requirements of the Optional Protocol. Amendments to
legislation, organizational restructuring and the provision of additional human, logistical and financial
resources are almost always needed if an existing human rights commission or ombudsman’s office is
to assume the role of NPM.
Furthermore, taking up a new mandate with a focus on prevention, rather than protection or investigation,
will require the NHRI to review its working methods, structure and professional composition. In some
cases, aspects of the NHRI work may make it inappropriate for designation as the NPM. This might be
the case for NHRIs that are predominantly reactive in nature, where the main focus is handling individual
complaints, or NHRIs which primarily undertake research or human rights education and promotion.
The Nairobi Declaration, adopted during the Ninth International Conference of National Institutions for the
Promotion and Protection of Human Rights in October 2008, states that NHRIs should encourage their
Governments “to consider their designation as national preventive mechanisms, only if the necessary
powers and resources are made available to them.”
There a number of issues that should be examined carefully when considering the designation of an
existing NHRI as a NPM, including:
• having a specific mandate to carry out preventive visits

• having sufficient resources to carry out full programme of regular visits
• guaranteed access to all places of detention
• guaranteed access to relevant information
• the right to conduct interviews with detainees in private
• independence
• relevant professional expertise
• the right to make recommendations to Government and relevant authorities and to receive a
considered response
• the right to publish reports
• necessary privileges and immunities
• whether there are other bodies carrying out visits to places of detention.
An assessment of these issues can help identify what additional legal measures, restructuring and
resources may be required for the NHRI to comply with the requirements of the Optional Protocol.
Furthermore, the process leading to the designation of the NHRI as NPM should be open, inclusive and
transparent.
Watch
Go to the Preventing Torture CD-Rom to watch Mark Thomson, Secretary-
General of the Association for the Prevention of Torture, discussing the
key issues that NHRIs should consider before taking on the role of national
preventive mechanism.
Click on ‘Feature materials’ and then select ‘Item 16 – National preventive
mechanisms: Issues for NHRIs to consider’.
3. NHRIs designated as NPM

3.1. Different NPM structures
There are three different ways in which NHRIs have been designated as NPMs under the Optional
Protocol.
3.1.1. NHRI as the sole NPM

This option can be found in the different regions in the world.
Americas
Ombudsman of Costa Rica, National Human Rights Commission of Mexico
Africa
Human Rights Commission of Mali, National Human Rights Commission of Mauritius
Asia
Human Rights Commission of the Maldives
Europe
Ombudsperson’s office in Albania, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Poland
3.1.2. NHRI as the NPM, in coordination with others

Under this model, the NHRI is officially designated as the NPM but conducts its mandate in formal
cooperation with others, in particular with civil society organizations. This model is commonly referred
to as the ‘Ombudsman +’ structure.
In Slovenia, the tasks and powers of the NPM are carried out by the Human Rights Ombudsman,
in cooperation with NGOs. In accordance with the legislation, NGOs registered in Slovenia can
participate in carrying out inspections in places of where people are deprived of their liberty.
The participating NGOs are selected by the Ombudsman on the basis of a public tender and a
cooperation contract is signed between the Ombudsman and each NGO.
3.1.3. NHRI designated one of several NPMs

States have the possibility to designate several NPMs, either on a regional or thematic basis. Under this
model, the NHRI can be one of several NPMs and may also act as a coordinating body.
In New Zealand, the following bodies have been designated as NPMs: the Ombudsman, the
Independent Police Conduct Authority, the Children’s Commissioner and the Inspector of Service
Penal Establishments. The New Zealand Human Rights Commission has been given the
coordinating role as the Central National Preventive Mechanism.
In Sweden, the Parliamentary Ombudsmen and the Chancellor of Justice have both been
designated as NPMs.
3.2. Specific challenges faced by NHRIs designated as NPM

Designating an existing NHRI as a NPM raises specific challenges in terms of the organization’s resources,
mandate and composition.
3.2.1. Resources
According to the Optional Protocol, States should make available the necessary resources for the
effective functioning of the NPM. Designating an existing NHRI as the NPM should not be viewed by
the Government as an economical way of implementing its responsibilities under the Optional Protocol.
As highlighted in the Nairobi Declaration, NHRIs can undertake this additional mandate only if they are
provided with the necessary human and financial resources.
3.2.2. Mandate
NHRIs have a mandate to handle complaints and to investigate and document cases of human rights
violations. Undertaking the role of NPM, which involves regular preventive visits and establishing a
constructive dialogue with authorities, may require the NHRI to make significant conceptual and structural
changes. The NHRI should take time to reflect on the new mandate and ensure that all staff members
have a clear understanding of the preventive approach. It is also advisable to establish a separate unit
within the NHRI to take on this preventive function. This can help avoid confusion among the authorities
or detainees about the specific mandate of the NPM.
The fact that the NHRI already undertakes visits to places of detention is not, in itself, sufficient to ensure
that these visits will meet the requirements of the Optional Protocol. The preventive visits described in
the Optional Protocol differ in their objectives and their approach from other types of visits, in particular
visits to investigate complaints of torture and ill-treatment.
While undertaking preventive visits, NHRIs will hear allegations of torture and ill-treatment. These should
be recorded and analysed to develop an understanding of systemic gaps within the centre and to guide
the development of recommendations to the authorities. Although NPM visits do not to document these
cases, NHRIs should have a clearly defined process in place to refer serious cases to the relevant unit
within the NHRI (the complaints unit) or to an appropriate external body for follow-up and investigation.
Image: International Committee of the Red Cross / Brendan Hoffman
3.2.3. Composition
In order to conduct effective preventive monitoring, NPMs need to draw on the expertise of members
from diverse professional backgrounds. Some NHRIs may already have a mix of relevant professional
skills and training. However many human rights commissions and, in particular, many Ombudsman’s
Offices are predominantly made up of lawyers and lack expertise in certain areas, especially in the medical
field. As a result, the capacity to hire external experts to assist in this monitoring work is crucial.
3.2.4. Annual report

NPMs are required to publish an annual report of their activities. This should preferably be a separate
annual report or, at the least, a separate chapter in the annual report of the NHRI.
In the Czech Republic, the Ombudsman (Public Defender of Rights) has been designated
as NPM following a revision of the mandate, the provision of additional financial resources and
the establishment of a new unit, comprising six staff, within the Office.
In Sweden, the two bodies designated as NPMs objected to their designation through
submissions to Parliament. The Parliamentary Ombudsmen have the mandate to carry out
unannounced visits and initiate investigations but consider that, as the institution is complaints-
driven and mostly reactive in character, its ability to carry out the preventive work required by
the Optional Protocol is limited. The Chancellor of Justice has wide supervisory powers but
is a reactive institution, composed of lawyers, which had not been given sufficient additional
resources to perform this additional task.
During its visit to Sweden in March 2008, the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture held discussions
with both NPMs. In its report, the Subcommittee considered that there was a need for a “profound
re-examination” of the designation and stated that “visiting methodology should reflect a preventive
approach, which although complementary, differs substantially from their current, complaint-driven
activities. The Swedish authorities should also ensure that these bodies receive the necessary
additional resources and training to function as NPMs” (CAT/OP/SWE/1, para. 38). The Swedish
Government has replied that budgetary issues will be dealt with in the framework of the annual
budgetary processes by the Parliament and Government (CAT/OP/SWE/1/Add.1, para. 3).
Watch
Go to the Preventing Torture CD-Rom to watch two examples of NHRIs –
in the Maldives and New Zealand – that are acting as national preventive
mechanisms.
Click on ‘Feature materials’ and then select ‘Item 17 – NHRIs: Case studies
of two NPMs’.
3.3. Interaction between designated NPM and the Subcommittee on

Prevention of Torture
The Optional Protocol provides for direct contact between the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture
and NPMs. When designated as the NPM, NHRIs can interact with the Subcommittee in several ways.
• NPMs and the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture can have direct contact
(articles 20 (f), 11 (b)(ii), 12 (c))
NPMs can provide information to the Subcommittee on their mandate and functioning, as well
as on their priority areas for the prevention of torture. They should also send their annual reports
to the Subcommittee.
The Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and NPMs can have direct contact in the form of
meetings, which can be held on a confidential basis if necessary. States parties to the Optional
Protocol have an obligation to facilitate and encourage direct contact between their NPMs and
the Subcommittee.
In the case of a country visit by the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture, NPMs should
establish contact with the Subcommittee at an early stage, provide concrete information regarding
priorities and specific places of detention to visit and offer advice on the implementation of
Optional Protocol’s requirements. During the visit, the Subcommittee and the NPM should have
direct contact. Following the visit, NPMs can lobby the Government to publish the report of the
Subcommittee, as well as closely monitor the implementation of its recommendations.
During visits to Mauritius (October 2007) and the Maldives (December 2007) the Subcommittee
on Prevention of Torture delegation met with representatives of the National Human Rights
Commissions of Mauritius and the Maldives, which had been designated as NPMs.
The Human Rights Commission of Mexico held a meeting with the Subcommittee on
Prevention of Torture during the session of the Subcommittee in Geneva in November 2007.
During its visit to Mexico (27 August–12 September 2008), the Subcommittee met with the NPM
Unit of the Human Rights Commission.
• Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture has a mandate to assist NPMs (articles 11 (b)(iii) and (iv))
The Optional Protocol sets out an important role for the Subcommittee to assist NPMs critically
evaluate their needs and capacity to strengthen protections for persons deprived of their liberty. The
Subcommittee can also provide advice and training to NPMs and make recommendations to the
State on its effective functioning. This advisory role is potentially very important; however, it is still
embryonic at this early stage of the Optional Protocol’s implementation. In its first annual report, the
Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture prepared “Preliminary guidelines for the ongoing development
of national preventative mechanisms” and is considering how it may develop this role further.
Watch
Chair of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture, discussing some of the
key elements of an effective national preventive mechanism.
Click on ‘Feature materials’ and then select ‘Item 18 – Operating an effective
NPM’.
4. Contribution of non-NPM NHRIs to the Optional

Protocol’s bodies
Even when NHRIs are not designated as NPMs, they can still make an important contribution to effective
implementation of the Optional Protocol.
4.1. Cooperation with the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture

With regard to the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture, NHRIs can provide credible information
regarding the situation of torture and ill-treatment in their country. They can also provide the
Subcommittee with independent information on the mandate and functioning of the NPM, as well as on
the implementation of recommendations submitted by the NPM.
During a country visit, NHRIs should meet with the Subcommittee delegation to present recent information
and discuss relevant issues in regard to torture prevention.
4.2. Contact with the NPM

NHRIs can play a complementary and supporting role with the organization, or organizations, designated
as the NPM.
They should establish direct and regular contact with the NPM and, if necessary assist the NPM to develop
its mandate by sharing their experience and methodologies. NHRIs can also assist the NPM in developing
effective ways of working with the authorities and establishing a constructive, ongoing dialogue.
NHRIs can bring issues of torture and ill-treatment to the attention of the NPM. In those countries where
the NHRI also has visiting powers, it should consider sharing information and coordinating its work
with the NPM in order to avoid duplication. NHRIs should also monitor the functioning of NPMs, their
independence and their effectiveness.
In France, the designation of the Ombudsman (Médiateur de la République) was initially

considered as an option for the NPM. However, in 2007, the decision was made to create
an entirely new body to carry out the NPM mandate: the General Inspector of Places of
Detention (Contrôleur général des lieux de privation de liberté). The Inspector is in regular
dialogue with other relevant bodies and has signed an agreement with the Ombudsman that aims
to clarify the division of tasks and avoid duplication.

• NHRIs can play an important role to promote the Optional Protocol,
by advocating ratification and participating in broad and inclusive
consultations on possible NPMs.
• NHRIs may be designated as the NPM; either as the sole NPM, in
cooperation with NGOs or as one of several NPMs. This double mandate
can present particular challenges for NHRIs.
• NHRIs not designated as the NPM can contribute to the work of the NPM
and the work of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture.
Further reading
In the CD-Rom
First Annual Report; Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture (CAT/C/40/2)
(from February 2007 to March 2008)
Second Annual Report; Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture (CAT/C/42/2)
(from February 2008 to March 2009)
Third Annual Report; Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture (CAT/C/44/2)
(from April 2009 to March 2010)
Report on the visit of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture to Sweden
(CAT/OP/SWE/1)
Report on the visit of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture to the
Maldives (CAT/OP/MDV/1)
Guide on the Establishment and Designation of National Preventive
Mechanisms; Association for the Prevention of Torture; 2006
Optional Protocol to the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment: Implementation Manual (revised edition);
Association for the Prevention of Torture and Inter-American Institute of Human Rights; 2010
National Human Rights Commissions and Ombudspersons’ Offices / Ombudsmen
as National Preventive Mechanisms; Association for the Prevention of Torture; 2008
Chapter 11:
Public inquiries
Key questions
• What are the advantages and disadvantages of NHRIs conducting a public
inquiry on torture and ill-treatment?
• What steps are involved in establishing and running an effective public
inquiry?

Paris Principles
concerned or through the exercise of its power to hear a matter without higher referral,
opinions, recommendations, proposals and reports on any matter concerning the
promotion and protection of human rights. The national institution may decide to
publicize them.
1. Introduction
Conducting a public inquiry on systemic violations of human rights, such as torture and ill-treatment, can
be a very effective strategy for NHRIs. This approach allows NHRIs to go beyond the investigation of
individual complaints. By gathering information and evidence from a variety of sources, a NHRI can identify
the underlying factors that contribute to the violation of human rights and propose recommendations for
positive change. Because the inquiry process is public, it can also help raise community awareness of
the issue and build understanding and support for recommendations made by the NHRI.
2. Advantages and disadvantages of a public inquiry

on torture
2.1. Advantages
A public inquiry is a comprehensive process that allows NHRIs to perform several functions at the same
time.
Handle a large number of complaints

A public inquiry on torture and ill-treatment in detention enables the NHRI to deal in a streamlined and
cost-effective way with a large number of individual cases. The proactive nature of the inquiry might also
mean that the NHRI receives complaints from individuals who, for various reasons, may not otherwise
106 | Chapter 11: Public inquiries

have made a formal complaint (such as lack of knowledge or lack of ability to address a petition). This is
especially true for vulnerable groups, such as young people, migrants or foreign detainees.
Investigate systemic causes of torture

In many cases torture and ill-treatment occur because of inadequate systems that allow or overlook
such acts, rather than the misbehaviour of isolated individuals. A public inquiry helps the NHRI to identify
the underlying factors that contribute to torture and ill-treatment and address systemic problems.
Analyse national laws and policies

A public inquiry provides an opportunity for the NHRI to analyse existing national laws and regulations
and assess whether or not they meet the State’s obligations under relevant international human rights
treaties. In addition, the inquiry might review and assess the policies and programmes that operate in
places of detention.
Educate and raise awareness

A public inquiry can be a powerful education tool to raise awareness among the general public, as well
as detained persons and professional groups, about the absolute prohibition of torture. It can also build
greater understanding and appreciation of a problem that is not necessarily understood as a human
rights issue, namely the treatment of persons in detention.
Develop effective recommendations

The recommendations from a public inquiry, which draw on evidence, analysis and research, will be
credible and provide clear and practical steps to address the systemic issues that contribute to torture
and ill-treatment in places of detention. In addition, media coverage and public engagement in the
process are also likely to generate some pressure for change. If there is a high level of public and media
scrutiny when the report is released, the Government will be obliged to respond to the report and its
recommendations.
2.2. Disadvantages
Resources
An effective public inquiry requires a significant investment of time, expertise and human and financial
resources. The resources needed will depend on the scale of the inquiry (regional or national), its breadth
(focused on specific places of detention or different types of detention facilities) and on the materials
that need to be produced. In terms of human resources, a number of full-time and/or part-time staff will
be required to conduct the inquiry, including administrative staff. The public inquiry may also require the
support of a media officer and the services of expert consultants.
Cooperation of witnesses
Torture and ill-treatment is a very sensitive issue. Speaking about their experiences can be a very difficult
and traumatizing process for victims. They may prefer to speak in confidential sessions, with one or two
interviewers, rather than in a public hearing. Victims and witnesses may also fear reprisals. In addition,
it might be difficult to gain the cooperation of key officials and representatives from relevant institutions.
A one-off activity rather than a process

A public inquiry puts the issue of torture and ill-treatment in the public spotlight for a very specific period
of time. However, because torture and ill-treatment is often a structural problem, a more permanent and
regular oversight process might be more effective in bringing about long-term positive change.
Chapter 11: Public inquiries | 107

3. Steps to undertake a public inquiry

Defining terms of reference
An important first step is to define the aim, scope and the timeframe of the public inquiry. While this
can be a detailed process, clearly defined terms of reference are a critical component of a focused and
effective inquiry.
Launching the inquiry

The public inquiry should be officially launched by the NHRI, with detailed information about the aims,
objectives and conduct of the inquiry provided to all relevant stakeholders.
Research and analysis

All relevant national laws and regulations should be compiled, as well as international and regional
standards and jurisprudence. This forms a basis to assess the extent to which the State is meeting its
international obligations to prevent torture.
Individual complaints
All relevant complaints received through the public inquiry should be compiled and assessed to identify
systemic factors that contribute to torture and ill-treatment in places of detention.
Public hearings
Public hearings should invite the participation of a broad range of individuals and organizations, including
victims of torture or their relatives, human rights NGOs, lawyers, police officers, staff and officials from
relevant detention centres and representatives from government agencies.

Visits to places of detention

Given that the risk of torture and ill-treatment is highest for persons deprived of their liberty, the public
inquiry will need to include thorough inspections of different places of detention.
Interviews with persons deprived of liberty

Depending on its scope, a central part of the public inquiry will involve interviews with persons deprived
of their liberty. Focus group discussions should be conducted with detainees. However, it is crucial that
the NHRI also conducts interviews in private with a large and representative selection of detainees.
Preparation of a report and recommendations

Preparing a final report is an important outcome for the public inquiry, although it may not necessarily
be the only one. It is important to consider the structure of the report in the early stages of the inquiry,
as this may influence the methodology of the inquiry process. Preparing a report is time-consuming and
this should not be underestimated in the planning stages of the inquiry.
An effective, successful report will consider the following elements.
• Style and language: The report should be accessible to the main target audiences. Sentences
should be short and concise, avoiding superlatives and stereotypes. Recommendations should
address the authorities responsible for their implementation and it should be relatively easy to
translate them into policies or laws.
• Content: All the issues outlined in the terms of reference should be addressed in the report.
Findings and conclusions should be firmly based on the evidence received. The report should
not only describe facts but also contain an analysis of the issues, the legal framework and any
identified shortcomings. A summary report is useful.
• Format and timing: The format of the report is important in terms of increasing publicity and
impact. Associated resources, such as a summary report, should be considered early in the
process. The timing of the report’s release should build upon the interest and momentum created
by the inquiry.
Follow-up
The NHRI should establish a dialogue with the relevant authorities to discuss steps to implement the
report’s recommendations. They should also closely monitor any developments related to the inquiry.
In 2005, the National Human Rights Commission of Mongolia conducted a year-long public
inquiry on torture. The inquiry examined the effectiveness of national legislation, scrutinized
procedures and regulations designed to prevent torture and ill-treatment, analysed the factors
contributing to illegal actions and developed recommendations to address systemic problems.
The inquiry included dialogues with the judiciary, defence attorneys, prosecutors, police officers,
citizens and NGO representatives. The Commission organized meetings with around 600 law
enforcement officers, collected testimonies from individuals, undertook monitoring visits to
prisons and pretrial detention facilities, conducted surveys with 1,400 detainees, held interviews
with 100 individuals and received more than 50 complaints.
Evidence gathered during the public inquiry, and documented in the inquiry report, served as the
basis for the enactment of legislation to prohibit torture.
Chapter 11: Public inquiries | 109

In 2004, the Australian Human Rights Commission published,

A last resort?, the report of its national inquiry into children in
immigration detention. The inquiry was established to examine
whether laws requiring the detention of asylum-seeking children and
their treatment in immigration detention met Australia’s obligations
under international law.
The Commission visited all immigration detention facilities in Australia;

organized 29 focus groups with over 200 children, parents and other
former detainees; held 61 public hearings and 24 confidential sessions;
and received 346 submissions. The draft report was provided to the
authorities for their comments, before the final report was publicly
released.
Watch
use national inquiries to build awareness and promote action to prevent
torture and ill-treatment of people in detention.
Click on ‘Feature materials’ and then select ‘Item 19 – NHRIs: Creating
change through national inquiries’.

• Conducting a public inquiry on torture and other forms of ill-treatment
allows NHRIs to perform several functions simultaneously; however, it also
presents challenges that should be considered.
• Holding a public inquiry on torture involves certain steps, such as defining
the inquiry’s terms of reference, research and analysis, holding public
hearings, visiting places of detention, conducting private interviews with
detainees and preparing a report and recommendations.
Further reading
National Human Rights Institutions in the Asia Pacific Region;
Brian Burdekin assisted by Jason Naum; The Raoul Wallenberg Institute
Human Rights Library; 2007
Going Public: Strategies for an Effective National Inquiry (DVD); Asia Pacific
Forum of National Human Rights Institutions; 2008

Summary
Introduction: The concept of torture prevention and its application
• States have an obligation to prevent torture.
• There is an important distinction between direct prevention (measures taken before torture occurs
to avoid it happening) and indirect prevention (measures taken after torture has occurred to avoid
its repetition).
• Preventing torture requires an integrated strategy involving three key elements: a strong legal
framework, effective implementation of the legal framework and control mechanisms to monitor
and support the legal framework and its implementation.
Chapter 1: What is torture?

• Article 1 of the Convention against Torture defines torture using three cumulative elements: the
intentional infliction of severe mental or physical pain; with the direct or indirect involvement of a
public official; for a specific purpose.
• Torture is prohibited under international law and can never be justified. The prohibition on torture
is absolute and non-derogable.
• Cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is also absolutely prohibited and non-
derogable.
Chapter 2: International and regional instruments on torture and other forms of

ill-treatment
• Torture is prohibited in a number of international human rights treaties.
• The Convention against Torture contains a series of provisions on prevention measures.
• Regional instruments in Africa, the Americas, Arab countries and Europe also prohibit torture.
• Soft law standards, both international and regional, complement the prohibition of torture and
other ill-treatment.

• NHRIs can promote ratification of relevant international human rights treaties, such as the
Convention against Torture and its Optional Protocol.
• NHRIs can promote legal reform, in particular making torture a crime under domestic law.
• NHRIs can promote reform of detention procedures.

• Internal consistency of a testimony is an important element that can support allegations of torture.
Other corroborating information should also be sought.
• Medical documentation, as well physical or psychological signs of torture, can provide further
evidence of torture.
• Formally recording the evidence gathered is crucial.
111
• Interviewing is important for a number of purposes, such as collecting information, assessing its
credibility and cross-checking.
• It is crucial to prepare for an interview and to be clear about what you hope to achieve.
• Interviewing is a delicate task and a primary goal is to build rapport with the interviewee. Basic
principles should be followed in terms of opening the interview, asking open and non-leading
questions, closing the interview and respecting confidentiality.
• Follow-up is essential, for example by preparing an affidavit or identifying other people to

interview.
• Interviewing victims of trauma poses specific challenges; an interviewer needs to be prepared for
this and know how to respond appropriately.

• Training public officials is an important way that NHRIs can contribute to the prevention of
torture.
• NHRIs can be involved in developing and revising training curricula and relevant training material
on torture prevention.
• NHRIs can develop and deliver training courses which is based on a needs assessment, contains
practical content, involves relevant participants and includes evaluation.
Chapter 7: Cooperating with international bodies

NHRIs can contribute to the effective work of international and regional bodies. They can
submit independent and credible information, participate in review procedures and follow up on
recommendations.
Interaction with the following mechanisms is important for the prevention of torture and ill-treatment:
• United Nations Human Rights Council, in particular the universal periodic review
• Treaty bodies, in particular the Committee against Torture
• Special procedures, in particular the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture
• Regional complaints mechanisms
• Visiting mechanisms at the international level, such as the Subcommittee on Prevention of
Torture, and the regional level.

• Monitoring places of detention through regular visits should respect basic principles, in particular
the principle to “do no harm”.
• Visits to places of detention should be well planned in terms of reviewing available information,
dividing tasks between team members and making prior contacts.
• Key steps involved in conducting a visit include: initial talk with the person in charge, tour of the
premises, consultation of registers, private interviews with detainees, final talk with the person in
charge.
• Reporting on visits and preparing recommendations is crucial as a follow-up mechanism and for
establishing an ongoing dialogue with the relevant authorities.
112

• Educating the general public about the prohibition and prevention of torture is an important
preventive action.
• Public education campaigns can help raise awareness about the issue and provide important
momentum for change.
• Awareness-raising activities can also focus on persons deprived of liberty and those who are
most at risk of torture and ill-treatment.
Chapter 10: NHRIs and the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture
• NHRIs can play an important role to promote the Optional Protocol, by advocating ratification and
participating in broad and inclusive consultations on possible NPMs.
• NHRIs may be designated as the NPM; either as the sole NPM, in cooperation with NGOs or as
one of several NPMs. This double mandate can present particular challenges for NHRIs.
• NHRIs not designated as the NPM can contribute to the work of the NPM and the work of the
Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture.

• Conducting a public inquiry on torture and other forms of ill-treatment allows NHRIs to
perform several functions simultaneously; however, it also presents challenges that should be
considered.
• Holding a public inquiry on torture involves certain steps, such as defining the inquiry’s terms of
reference, research and analysis, holding public hearings, visiting places of detention, conducting
private interviews with detainees and preparing a report and recommendations.
113
Readings available in the CD-Rom

United Nations instruments and standards
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
Treaties
Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment
or Punishment
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Convention on the Rights of the Child
International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their
Families
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
Other standards
Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations
of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law
Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners
Key documents
Committee against Torture, general comment No. 2 on implementation of article 2 by States Parties
Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 20: replaces general comment 7 concerning prohibition
of torture and cruel treatment or punishment (art. 7); 10 March 1992
First Annual Report, Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture (February 2007 to March 2008)
Second Annual Report, Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture (February 2008 to March 2009)
Third Annual Report, Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture (April 2009 to March 2010)
Report on the visit of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture to the Maldives (10–17 December 2007)
Report on the visit of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture to Sweden (10–14 March 2008)
Regional instruments and standards

Africa
African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights
Robben Island Guidelines for the Prohibition and Prevention of Torture, Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment in Africa
Americas
Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture
Principles and Best Practices on the Protection of Persons Deprived of Liberty in the Americas
114
Europe
European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
The CPT Standards (European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment)
European Prison Rules
Reports and resources

12-Point Programme for the Prevention of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment
or Punishment by Agents of the State; Amnesty International; 2005 (revised) (© Amnesty International
Publications, 1 Easton Street, London WC1X 0DW, United Kingdom; www.amnesty.org)
Advisory Council of Jurists Reference on Torture (including Minimum Interrogation Standards); Asia
Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions; 2005
Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights: A Practitioner’s Handbook; Ugur Erdal and
Hasan Bakirci, OMCT Handbook Series Vol. 1; 2006
Assessing the Effectiveness of National Human Rights Institutions; Richard Carver, International Council
for Human Rights Policy; 2005
Bringing the International Prohibition of Torture Home: National Implementation Guide for the UN
Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; The
Redress Trust; 2006
Combating Torture: A Manual for Action; Amnesty International; 2003 (© Amnesty International
Publications, 1 Easton Street, London WC1X 0DW, United Kingdom; www.amnesty.org)
Defusing the Ticking Bomb Scenario: Why we must say NO to torture, always; Association for the
Detention Monitoring Briefing No. 1: Making Effective Recommendations; Association for the Prevention
of Torture; 2008
Detention Monitoring Briefing No. 2: The Selection of Persons to Interview in the Context of Preventive
Detention Monitoring; Association for the Prevention of Torture; 2009
Detention Monitoring Briefing No. 3: Using Interpreters in Detention Monitoring; Association for the
Developing Effective Media Communication Skills; Institute for Media, Policy and Civil Society; 2001
Engagement of National Human Rights Institutions with the Universal Periodic Review Mechanism; ICC
Position Paper Volume III (Draft, March 2007)
Engagement of National Human Rights Institutions with the Special Procedures; ICC Position Paper
Volume IV (Draft, March 2007)
Guide on the Establishment and Designation of National Preventive Mechanisms; Association for the
Human Rights and Law Enforcement: A Manual on Human Rights Training for the Police; Professional
Training Series No. 5; OHCHR; 1997
Human Rights and Law Enforcement: A Trainer’s Guide on Human Rights for the Police; Professional
Training Series No. 5/Add. 2; OHCHR, 2002
115
Human Rights in the Administration of Justice: A Manual of Human Rights for Judges, Prosecutors
and Lawyers; Professional Training Series No. 9; OHCHR, in cooperation with the International Bar
Association; 2003
Istanbul Protocol: Manual on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel,
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; Professional Training Series No. 8; OHCHR; 2001
Making Standards Work: An International Handbook on Good Prison Practice; Penal Reform
International; 2001
Media Communications Toolkit; Institute for Media, Policy and Civil Society; 2001
Monitoring Places of Detention: A Practical Guide; Association for the Prevention of Torture; 2004
National Human Rights Institutions and the UN Human Rights Council; ICC Position Paper Volume I
(27 June 2006)
National Human Rights Institutions and the Special Procedures and Universal Periodic Review
Mechanism; ICC Position Paper Volume II (22 September 2006)
National Human Rights Institutions: Handbook on the Establishment and Strengthening of National
Institutions for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights; Professional Training Series No. 4;
OHCHR; 1995
National Human Rights Commissions and Ombudspersons’ Offices / Ombudsmen as National Preventive
Mechanisms; Association for the Prevention of Torture; 2008
Optional Protocol to the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment: Implementation Manual (revised edition); Association for the
Prevention of Torture and the Inter-American Institute of Human Rights; 2010
Preventing Torture in the 21st Century; Essex Human Rights Review (Vol. 6, No. 1); Human Rights
Centre, University of Essex; 2009
The Prohibition of Torture and Ill-Treatment in the Inter-American Human Rights System: A Handbook
for Victims and Their Advocates; Diego Rodríguez-Pinzón and Claudia Martin, OMCT Handbook Series
Vol. 2; 2006
The Prohibition of Torture and Ill-Treatment in the African Human Rights System: A Handbook for Victims
and Their Advocates; Frans Viljoen and Chidi Odinkalu, OMCT Handbook Series Vol. 3; 2006
The Right of Access to Lawyers for Persons Deprived of Liberty; Legal Briefing Series, Association for
the Prevention of Torture; March 2010
The Role of National Human Rights Institutions in the United Nations Treaty Body Process; Marei Müller
and Frauke Seidensticker, German Institute for Human Rights; 2007
The Torture Reporting Handbook; Camille Giffard, Human Rights Centre, University of Essex; 2000
Torture in International Law: A Guide to Jurisprudence; Association for the Prevention of Torture and the
Center for Justice and International Law; 2008
Training Manual on Human Rights Monitoring; Professional Training Series No. 7; OHCHR; 2001
Training Package for Prison Officials. Human Rights and Prisons: A Manual on Human Rights Training
for Prison Officials; Professional Training Series No. 11; OHCHR; 2005
Visiting places of detention: What role for physicians and other health professionals?; Association for the
Working with the United Nations Human Rights Programme: A Handbook for Civil Society; OHCHR, 2008
116

Preventing Torture: An Operational Guide For National Human Rights Institutions

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Preventing Torture: An Operational Guide For National Human Rights Institutions

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Preventing Torture: An Operational Guide For National Human Rights Institutions

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Preventing Torture

An Operational Guide for

Preventing Torture: An Operational Guide for National Human Rights Institutions

© Copyright OHCHR, APT and APF May 2010

Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions

Introduction: The concept of torture prevention and its application 1

Part I Prohibition of torture: The legal background 11

Part II Preventing torture: NHRIs in action 25

Section II Contributing to the implementation of the

Section III Acting as a control mechanism 61

Section IV Cross-cutting actions 97

APF Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions

APT Association for the Prevention of Torture

ICC International Coordinating Committee of National Institutions for the Promotion

NGO Non-governmental organization

NHRI National human rights institution

NPM National preventive mechanism under the Optional Protocol to the

UPR Universal periodic review

Introduction for users

Introduction for users | v

vi | Introduction for users

Objectives and content

Introduction for users | vii

1. Introduction: A duty to prevent

Introduction: The concept of torture prevention and its application | 1

2. What does “Torture prevention” mean?

Image: International Committee of the Red Cross / Fred Clarke

2 | Introduction: The concept of torture prevention and its application

2.2. Analysing the risk factors

Introduction: The concept of torture prevention and its application | 3

3. The three components of an integrated preventive

• a legal framework that prohibits torture

4 | Introduction: The concept of torture prevention and its application

Existence of a comprehensive legal framework

States can draw on the international legal framework by:

• ratifying relevant international human rights treaties

Introduction: The concept of torture prevention and its application | 5

Implementation of the legal framework

Training and education

Investigation and punishment

6 | Introduction: The concept of torture prevention and its application

The following actions should be taken:

• strengthening the independence of the judiciary

Reparation for victims

Introduction: The concept of torture prevention and its application | 7

In addition to internal control mechanisms, it is essential to set up independent mechanisms to visit

4. The relevance of torture prevention to NHRIs

NHRIs can contribute to the development of an effective legal framework by:

• encouraging the State to ratify relevant international human rights treaties

NHRIs can contribute to implementation of the legal framework by:

• reviewing detention procedures

• cooperating with international bodies

8 | Introduction: The concept of torture prevention and its application

Key points: Introduction

Introduction: The concept of torture prevention and its application | 9

Chapter 1: What is torture?

This definition contains three cumulative elements:

• the intentional infliction of severe mental or physical suffering

12 | Chapter 1: What is torture?