A problematic Israeli High Court dismissal of a torture complaint. A commentary by Hans Draminsky Petersen, MD

It is not for the documenting medical experts (Shir, 2019), but for the court to decide whether the level of pain and suffering inflicted reaches the threshold of torture [while disregarding ill-treatment], i.e., the court upholds the prerogative to apply its own interpretation of the definition of torture, no matter existing medical evidence and disregarding the Istanbul Protocol. The criteria used to determine the level of FT's pain and suffering does not appear in the ruling. The ruling states that the burden of proof that the "means" were not reasonable [constituting torture] falls upon the petitioner (para 36). In the light of the above (1, a-h) this is in practice impossible for the petitioner to establish. This aligns with Shir’s statement that no ISA interrogator has been indicted in 1200 torture complaints

Looking back at experiences from 30 years with documentation and prevention of torture

Contribution to the 30th Anniversary of the Torture Journal by Dr. Hans Draminsky Petersen. The author describes his more than 30-years’ of experience in conducting monitoring visits to detention centres in different countries with an analytical perspective on the elements that perpetuate torture

Torture: An Expert’s Confrontation with an Everyday Evil, by Manfred Nowak

Manfred Nowak, the author of this book, is an expert with outstanding experience in the fight against torture. Among many international commitments, he was the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture (SRT) for six years from 2004 and the book is predominately based on this experience. Nowak aims to make the unfathomable more comprehensible and to clarify the causes and dynamics of the routine nature of torture; to enhance empathy for the forgotten detainees; and to point to ways of preventing torture. Putting existing knowledge into practice will, however, only work if enough people become outraged and place moral and political pressure on authorities to end torture. This book review reflects upon this important contribution.&nbsp

Detainees' perception of the doctors and the medical institution in Spanish police stations: An impediment in the fight against torture and ill-treatment

Background: As part of a program by the Basque Government (Spain) and the University of the Basque Country, persons who have alleged exposure to torture and ill-treatment have been examined by psychologists and psychiatrists according to the Istanbul Protocol (IP). Medical examinations of detainees with the aim, inter alia, to document abuses is fundamental for torture prevention. The IP prescribes how this should be done to ensure data collection and prevent reprisals for having reported ill-treatment to the doctor. Objectives: The objectives were to assess detainees' perception of the medical examinations which they underwent at different types of Spanish police institution and to compare practice between institutions; and, to compare information from the period 1969-1991 with that from 1992-2014. Methods: All information about medical examinations of incommunicado detainees from 202 extensive IP reports was analysed according to a 19-item tool developed for the purpose dealing with the doctors' professional performance, the confidence of the detainees in the doctors, reprisals and procedural safeguards (Annex 1). All information was classified as acceptable, unacceptable /insufficient or totally unacceptable. Findings: Very often the detainees perceived the doctors' professional performance as insufficient or totally unacceptable and the doctors did not instil their confidence. Threats of police reprisals and failure to observe procedural safeguards were often reported. There were no differences in the comparison between institutions. When comparing the two study periods an improvement was found over time. However, 64% of the scores came out as totally unacceptable or insufficient for the most recent period indicating that the medical institution in police stations where the detentions had taken place failed to constitute a preventive means against torture and ill-treatment. Limitations: Only 57% of the 202 reports assessed contained relevant information; data was retrieved retrospectively; the interviews were done years after detention without a particular focus on medical examinations

Factor interaction in prevention of torture Reflections based on Carver and Handley’s research (with Comment by the authors of the book and Response by the author of the paper)

Summary“Does torture prevention work?” is a very comprehensive book based on commendably profound research in 16 countries. It contains a wealth of very important results concerning the relationship between a multitude of factors in the prevention and occurrence of torture. However, the results described may be interpreted in a manner different to how it was done in the book. The intention of this paper is to draw attention to some challenges in the research design and to give a broader view of the complexity of torture prevention. The book: The authors have identified a host of preventive factors, organised them in clusters (detention law and practice; prosecution (of torturers) law and practice; complaint law and practice; and, monitoring law and practice), and scored them according to whether they fulfil international standards. A torture score comprising frequency, geographical spread and severity of torture was constructed (CHATS). Ill-treatment was excluded. Correlations between preventive factors, clusters and CHATS were calculated. However, the interrelationship between various factors and clusters was not analysed. The main findings included that detention practice had the strongest (negative) correlation to torture and that the torture scoring, pooled for all countries, declined during the study period (1985-2014). Comment: For several reasons, distinguishing ‘more severe torture’ from ‘torture’ is problematic. Excluding illtreatment in the research is also problematic because the border between the two may be blurred and difficult to interpret and it may be manipulated by authorities, leading to falsely low torture incidence. The pooling of data of diverse quality may hide outstanding prevention results. Identification and implementation of best practices is recommended. Preventive means implemented with low quality may give legitimacy to practices in torturing detentions. The quality of preventive actions is key to efficiency. Factors and clusters of preventive means interact in synergy making each other fully effective. A new model for torture prevention is proposed, which emphasises that all preventive means interact together with transparency, lack of corruption and reprisals, forming the practices in detention where torture takes place. The political will to prevent torture is a key factor