Building the Legal Barriers to Torture

In 1984, the member states of the UN adopted the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. They sought to provide the world with a robust international treaty that would reaffirm the absolute prohibition of torture under any circumstances. The Convention defines torture and outlines measures to prohibit, prevent, and protect against the risk of torture.

Individual states can ratify the Convention to indicate their consent to to be bound to and implement the Convention's measures.

In 2002, the member states of the UN adopted the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture. With this Optional Protocol, they sought to complement the Convention against Torture with measures focused on the prevention of torture.

As with the Convention against Torture, we assess whether individual states have ratified the Optional Protocol.

The UN Convention against Torture established the Committee against Torture (CAT), an international body of experts responsible for supervising the implementation of the Convention by the states that have ratified it. As part of this review process, the states have to submit their official report explaining how they implement the Convention.

We note whether each state has submitted their initial report to the CAT.

The constitution of a state is the most important official, legal text that sets the principles, the structure and organisation of the state, its main institutions and their relationships (e.g. relations between the government and the Parliament). Because torture is a severe human rights violation, states are encouraged to show their willingness to eradicate it by stating clearly in their constitution that it is prohibited.

Domestic law refers to any law or regulation adopted by a state, being applicable all over its territory. It may comprise criminal and civil legislation, along with other subjects. An important obligation for states parties to the Convention against Torture is to prohibit, criminalize and punish torture under domestic law (often in the criminal law or code).

We assess whether each state has fully or partially criminalised torture.

National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) are state bodies with the mandate to protect and promote human rights in their countries. Although established by the state, they operate independently from the state and the government.

In 1993, the UN General Assembly adopted the Paris Principles, which require NHRIs to be fully independent and to comply with other principles such a broad mandate and functions, pluralism of members, adequate powers and resources, and cooperative methods. We assess whether a state's NHRI fully complies with these principles.

The states parties to the Optional Protocol have the obligation to establish independent institutions called "national preventive mechanisms" (NPMs) whose mandate is to prevent torture. To do so, they monitor places of detention - such as prisons, police stations, and immigration detention centers - where torture is most likely to occur.

There are multiple steps to implementing NPMs. The first is designating an NPM, which decrees which institution takes on this mandate. However, an NPM is not fully implemented until it has become operational and can conduct monitoring visits, make reports and recommendations, and enter into dialogue with authorities. We note whether a state's NPM is both designated and operational or designated only.