The UN Convention Against Torture at 20 -- remarkable achievements, formidable challenges



*** Learn more about the International Day in support of Victims of
Torture, 26 June 2007:
http://www.hrea.org/feature-events/torture-victims-day.php


AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL Public Statement 
AI Index: IOR 51/004/2007 (Public) 
News Service No: 118 
25 June 2007 

Amnesty International today called on all states to eradicate the scourge
of torture and all other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment. The call came as the world prepared to mark the 20th
anniversary, on 26 June 2007, of the entry into force of the UN Convention
against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment, adopted in 1984 for signature and ratification after long
campaigning by Amnesty International and other organizations.

On the eve of that anniversary, a substantial majority of the world's
states -- 144 in all regions -- will have ratified the Convention and a
further eight states will have signed it. Its adoption has contributed to
regional treaties prohibiting torture and torture has been included as a
war crime and a crime against humanity in the Rome Statute of the
International Criminal Court. The Committee against Torture regularly
reviews reports of states parties on the implementation of the Convention,
making findings and recommendations to states on how to prevent and punish
torture and provide reparations to victims. The Committee also examines
individual complaints by victims alleging torture. The UN has appointed a
Special Rapporteur on torture to address reports of torture and recommend
actions by all states, whether they are parties to the Convention or not.

The Convention has a number of important features. It defines torture
(Article 1) as both a human rights violation and a crime, involving the
intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering for purposes such as
punishment, intimidation and the obtaining of information, when done by
officials, at their instigation or with their consent or acquiescence.

It requires each state party to "take effective legislative,
administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent torture," makes
clear that "o exceptional circumstances whatsoever" justify torture and
rules out any defence of superior orders (Article 2). Article 3 prohibits
the transfer (refoulement) of anyone to a place where he or she risks
torture and Article 4 requires that all acts of torture be defined as a
crime. States must investigate when anyone suspected of torture is found
on their territory (Article 6), must provide for universal jurisdiction
over such persons (Article 5 (2)) and, if such suspects are not
extradited, submit the case to their prosecutors (Article 7 (1)). They
must investigate promptly and impartially whenever there are reasonable
grounds to believe that an act of torture has occurred in territory
subject to their jurisdiction or such an act is alleged (Articles 12 and
13). States must train all law enforcement personnel not to torture
(Article 10), provide reparations to victims (Article 14) and exclude any
statement made as the result of torture in any proceeding, except to prove
that torture occurred (Article 15). The Convention also requires states to
take measures against other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment (Article 16).

Last year saw a further major development towards greater protection
against torture and other ill-treatment. On 22 June 2006, the Optional
Protocol to the Convention, which had been adopted on 18 December 2002,
entered into force. To date, 56 States have signed the Protocol, and 34
have ratified or acceded to it. The Protocol mandates independent
international experts to conduct regular visits to places of detention
within states parties, and requires states parties to set up national
mechanism to conduct visits to places of detention and to cooperate with
the international experts.

However the Convention, and the struggle to rid the world of torture and
other ill-treatment in general, continue to face serious challenges.

These challenges include, first and foremost, the continued infliction, in
many countries, of torture and other ill-treatment on detainees, prisoners
and others. In police stations, prisons, military detention facilities,
interrogation centres and other locations all around the world officials
abuse the absolute power they have over defenceless persons deprived of
their liberty and inflict pain on them, or else they allow others to
inflict such pain with impunity.

Amnesty International's annual reports depressingly show, year after year,
that the majority of states in the world still torture or ill-treat
persons under their control. Of the 153 states and territories surveyed in
the organization's 2007 annual report, at least 102 had resorted to
torture or other ill-treatment.

Another challenge is the attempts by some to challenge the absolute
prohibition on torture and other ill-treatment, for instance by arguing
that they are essential weapons in the "war on terror."  Facing an outcry
against such a call for states to adopt criminal conduct as official
policy, certain governments have resorted, instead, to playing word-games,
making definitional and interpretational manoeuvres including by:

- claiming that certain methods of interrogation or forms of punishment
do not constitute torture; 
- claiming that the prohibition on cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment is not quite as absolute as that on torture,
and therefore states may ill-treat prisoners in certain
circumstances; 
- "subcontracting" torture to other states and claiming that
responsibility rests solely with them; 
- circumventing non-refoulement obligations through devices such as
diplomatic assurances. 

Why is the eradication of torture and ill-treatment proving so elusive?
Reasons include lack of political will and failure to enact effective
implementing legislation, to provide training, to investigate or
prosecute, extradite and to establish effective procedures for victims to
obtain reparations no matter who committed them and no matter where the
torture occurred.

What must be done? States must take their international obligations
seriously. Those which have not ratified the Convention must do so. Those
which have attached reservations weakening the Convention's protections
must withdraw them. Those which have not allowed individual complaints to
be considered by the Committee against Torture must now allow such
complaints. Those which have not ratified the Optional Protocol must do
so. States must also contribute generously to the United Nations Voluntary
Fund for Victims of Torture.

States parties should also nominate and vote for independent candidates of
the highest calibre in elections to the Committee against Torture which
will take place on 8 October 2007. Candidates should possess a broad
experience relevant to the Convention, an in-depth understanding of issues
relevant to the deprivation of liberty and a long-standing commitment to
human rights. Candidates should not hold a position in the executive or
legislative branch of government. In order to improve the selection of
candidates, states should put in place a process at the national level
which is consultative, transparent and well-publicized. Amnesty
International urges states parties to ensure that considerations of
quality prevail over those of politics in the forthcoming elections.

At the national level, states must amend flawed implementing legislation
and enact effective implementing legislation where none exists, provide
training, establish special units of police and prosecutors to investigate
reports of torture and to prosecute suspects, including on the basis of
universal jurisdiction, or extradite them to states able to do so in fair
trials without the death penalty or the risk of torture or ill-treatment.
Indeed, they must never transfer anyone to any place where they would be
at risk of torture or ill-treatment. They must establish independent,
professional and adequately resourced national visiting mechanisms in
accordance with the provisions of the Optional Protocol.

A positive example of action at the national level is the appeal launched
today by Redress in the Parliament in London to enact the Torture
(Damages) Bill, introduced in the House of Lords on 5th March 2007 [HL
Bill 49]. This bill, strongly supported by Amnesty International, would
provide effective procedures for fulfilling the United Kingdom's
obligations under Article 14 of the Convention against Torture by
permitting any victim of torture to obtain reparation in civil proceedings
even when committed abroad.

Torturers must not be allowed to get away with their crimes -- be they
perpetrators, their civilian superiors or military commanders or the state
as a whole. Victims must not be left to suffer -- their torture must be
stopped, their torturers punished, and their right to reparation ensured.



[Reply to this message] [Start a new topic] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index] [Subject Index] [List Home Page] [HREA Home Page]