FREEDOM FROM TORTURE, AND

OTHER CRUEL, INHUMAN OR

DEGRADING, TREATMENT OR
PUNISHMENT (CIDTP)
 TORTURE

• Torture as defined by the Convention against Torture and other CIDTP, Article
I:
• “"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. 
 CRUEL, INHUMAN OR DEGRADING,
TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT.

• Per Article 16 of the Convention:

• “Each State Party shall undertake to prevent in any territory under its jurisdiction other
acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment which do not amount to
torture”
•  In Soering v. United Kingdom:
• “Treatment has been held by the Court to be both "inhuman" because it was
premeditated, was applied for hours at a stretch and "caused, if not actual bodily injury,
at least intense physical and mental suffering
• "degrading" because it was "such as to arouse in [its] victims feelings of fear, anguish
and inferiority capable of humiliating and debasing them and possibly breaking their
physical or moral resistance””
 CRUEL, INHUMAN OR DEGRADING,
TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT.

• In Soering v. United Kingdom:

• “In order for a punishment or treatment associated with it to be "inhuman" or
"degrading", the suffering or humiliation involved must in any event go beyond that
inevitable element of suffering or humiliation connected with a given form of
legitimate punishment”
 CIDTP

• In Gafgen v Germany:
• “…In order for ill-treatment to fall within the scope of Article 3 it must attain a
minimum level of severity.
• The assessment of this minimum depends on all the circumstances of the case, such as:
• Duration of the treatment, its physical or mental effects and, in some cases, the sex,
age and state of health of the victim.
• The purpose for which the treatment was inflicted together with the intention or
motivation behind it
• Its context, such as an atmosphere of heightened tension and emotions.”
 TORTURE AND CIDTP

Torture CIDTP
Intentionally inflicted
For the purpose of: No purposive element.
• Obtaining confession or information
• Punishment
• Intimidation or coercion
Or done because of discrimination

• Both involve physical or mental, pain or suffering.

 TORTURE AND CIDTP

• In Gafgen v. Germany:
• “…The classification of whether a given threat of physical torture amounted to
psychological torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment depends upon all the
circumstances of a given case, including, notably, the severity of the pressure exerted
and the intensity of the mental suffering caused.”
 SOERING V UK

• Soering was a german national that lived in Virginia U.S. who allegedly
murdered his girlfriend’s parents then disappeared and later arrested in England
for cheque fraud.
• U.S. requested extradition to where the U.K. authorities asked for assurances
that the death penalty in Virginia would not be imposed in case he was found
guilty.
• Applicant filed this application to the ECHR arguing that if U.K. extradites him
to the U.S. they would be in violation of Article 3 of the European Convention.
• Issue is WON extradition of Soering to the U.S. would be a violation of Article
3 of the European Convention by the U.K.?
• Court ruled in his case, yes because him experiencing the death row
phenomenon while on death row would be cruel, inhuman, and degrading.
 PUBLIC COMMITTEE AGAINST
TORTURE IN ISRAEL V ISRAEL

• Applicant’s is seeking relief from the Israel Supreme Court concerning the
methods of interrogation of their Counter-terrorism unit, particularly the
shaking and shabach method of interrogation.
• The State argues that these measures are allowed by virtue of the “necessity”
defense in their laws.
• WON the methods used by the GSS should be allowed?
• Court ruled no. A reasonable investigation is necessarily one free from torture
and ill-treatment which is absolute.
 GAFGEN V GERMANY

• Gafgen filed this application seeking relief from the ECHR for retrial of his
criminal case alleging that his rights were violated.
• He was accused and found guilty for killing a child.
• When caught and interrogated by the police, he was threatened with physical
and sexual abuse if he did not disclose the whereabouts of the child.
• Issue: WON the threat of physical and sexual abuse was a violation of Article 3
of the Convention.
• Court ruled yes. It causes mental suffering which at least could be considered
as ill-treatment.
 ALMONTE V PEOPLE

• Petitioners are seeking relief from the Court asking for temporary release from
prison alleging that they are among the elderly, sick, and pregnant population of
the prison, and that they are exposed to the dangers of COVID where social
distancing and self-isolation measures are allegedly impossible
• They seek temporary release from prison based on humanitarian grounds, and is
asking the Court to exercise its equity jurisdiction.
• Issue is WON the Court should temporarily release the prisoners based on
humanitarian grounds?
• Court treated the petition as applications for bail and refers their applications to the
respective trial courts where their cases are pending.
 FREEDOM FROM TORTURE AND CIDTP

• Absolute.
• Non-derogable.
 FREEDOM FROM TORTURE AND CIDTP

• Article 2(2) of the Convention reads:

• “No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war,
internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a
justification of torture. ”
• Threat of terrorism, violent crime, armed conflict, to protect public safety, or
avert emergencies, religious and traditional justifications are not allowed as the
prohibition against torture is absolute and non-derogable.
• Per General Comment No. 2, the prohibition of ill-treatment is likewise non-
derogable.
• In Gafgen v Germany:
• “Article 3 does not allow for any exceptions or justifying factors or balancing of
interests, irrespective of the conduct of the person concerned and the nature of the
offence at issue.”
 THE CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE
AND OTHER CIDTP

Article 1 Definition of Torture

Article 2 Obligation of State Parties to take
effective measures to prevent torture
under its territory.
Absolute and non-derogable prohibition
on torture.
Order from a public authority may not
be invoked as a justification of torture
Article 3 Obligation not to extradite a person to
another State where there are
substantial grounds to believe that that
person would be subjected to torture.
Article 4 Obligation to make torture as a criminal
offense in its criminal law.
Article 5 Obligation to take measures to establish
jurisdiction over torture offenses the
following cases:
• Offense committed in any of its
territory including in a ship or
aircraft registered to that State
• Offender is a national of their State
• Victim is a national of that State and
considers it appropriate.
• Alleged offender is a national of
another State but is present in its
territory.
Article 6 Obligation to examine in its territory a
person alleged to have committed
torture
Article 7 Obligation to prosecute and fair
treatment to the alleged offenders.
Article 8 The offences referred to in article 4
shall be deemed to be included as
extraditable offences in any extradition
treaty existing between States Parties. 
Article 9 States Parties shall afford one another
the greatest measure of assistance in
connection with criminal proceedings
brought in respect of any of the
offences referred to in article 4,
including the supply of all evidence at
their disposal necessary for the
proceedings. 
Article 10 Obligation to educate and inform law
enforcement personnel, medical
personnel, public officials, and other
persons who may be involved in the
custody of a person regarding the
prohibition against torture.
Article 11 Obligation to systematically review
interrogation rules, and arrangements
for the custody and treatment of
persons subjected to any form of arrest,
detention or imprisonment in any
territory under its jurisdiction, 
Article 12 Obligation to conduct a prompt and
impartial investigation when there is a
reasonable ground to believe that there
was torture.
Article 13 Obligation to ensure that any individual
who alleges he has been subjected to
torture in any territory under its
jurisdiction has the right to complain to,
and to have his case promptly and
impartially examined.
Obligation to protect the complainant
and the witnesses.
Article 14 Obligation to provide redress and an
enforceable right to fair and adequate
compensation for the victims of torture.
Article 15 Obligation to exclude any statement
acquired from torture as evidence in
any proceeding except as evidence
against a person accused of torture.
Article 16 Obligation to prevent in its territory
CIDTP.
 OPTIONAL PROTOCOL TO THE CONVENTION
AGAINST TORTURE AND CIDTP

Article I. Objective of the protocol is to establish

a system of regular visits by
international or national bodies to
places where people are deprived of
their liberty to prevent torture and ill-
treatment.
Article 2. Creation of subcommittee to carry-out
the provisions of the Protocol
Article 3. Obligation of States to set up a
domestic body to visit their detention
places for the prevention of torture
Article 4. Obligation of State parties to allow
visits to their detention places
Articles 5-10 Composition of the subcommittee
Article 11 Mandate of the subcommittee to visit
detention places and make
recommendations for the protection of
persons deprived of liberty against
torture and CIDTP
Article 12 Obligation of State Parties to receive
the subcommittee in their territory and
provide all relevant information.
Article 14 Obligation of State Parties to grant to
the subcommittee unrestricted access to
all information concerning the number,
the places of detention, the treatment of
persons deprived of liberty, and
opportunity to interview those persons.
Article 15 Obligation not to sanction any person
who communicated to the
subcommittee any information.
Articles 16 Duty of the subcommittee to
communicate recommendations and
observations confidentially
Article 17 Obligation of States to establish one or
several independent national preventive
mechanisms to prevent torture and
CIDTP.
Article 19 Power of national preventive
mechanisms to:
• Regularly examine the treatment of
persons deprived of liberty.
• To make recommendations
• To submit proposals for legislation
Article 20 Obligation of States to grant national
preventive mechanisms to access to all
relevant information on detention and
treatment of persons deprived of liberty
 GENERAL COMMENT NO. 2

• Implementation of Article 2:
• Article 2, paragraph 1, obliges each State party to take actions that will reinforce the prohibition
against torture through legislative, administrative, judicial, or other actions that must, in the end, be
effective in preventing it.
• The obligation to prevent ill-treatment in practice overlaps with and is largely congruent with the
obligation to prevent torture.
• In practice, the definitional threshold between ill-treatment and torture is often not clear. Experience
demonstrates that the conditions that give rise to ill-treatment frequently facilitate torture and
therefore the measures required to prevent torture must be applied to prevent ill-treatment.
• The prohibition of ill-treatment to be likewise non-derogable under the Convention and its
prevention to be an effective and non-derogable measure.
 GENERAL COMMENT NO. 2

• Implementation of Article 2:
• States parties are obligated to eliminate any legal or other obstacles that impede the
eradication of torture and ill-treatment; and to take positive effective measures to
ensure that such conduct and any recurrences thereof are effectively prevented.
 GENERAL COMMENT NO. 2

• Absolute Prohibition:
• Article 2, paragraph 2, provides that the prohibition against torture is absolute and
non-derogable. It emphasizes that no exceptional circumstances whatsoever may be
invoked by a State Party to justify acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.
• Article 16 prohibiting cruel, inhuman or degrading, treatment or punishment must be
observed in all circumstances.
• Articles 3-15 are also obligatory that applies both to torture and ill-treatment.
• The principle of non-derogability must be applied to protect any person, citizen or
non-citizen without discrimination
 GENERAL COMMENT NO. 2

• Obligation to take effective measures to prevent torture.

• States parties must make the offence of torture punishable as an offence under its
criminal law, in accordance, at a minimum, with the elements of torture.
• The elements of intent and purpose in article 1 do not involve a subjective inquiry into
the motivations of the perpetrators, but rather must be objective determinations under
the circumstances. It is essential to investigate and establish the responsibility of
persons in the chain of command as well as that of the direct perpetrator(s).
• By defining the offence of torture as distinct from common assault or other crimes, the
Committee considers that States parties will directly advance the Convention’s
overarching aim of preventing torture and ill-treatment. Naming and defining this
crime will promote the Convention’s aim, inter alia, by alerting everyone, including
perpetrators, victims, and the public, to the special gravity of the crime of torture.
 GENERAL COMMENT NO. 2

• Obligation to take effective measures to prevent torture.

• States parties must make the offence of torture punishable as an offence under its
criminal law, in accordance, at a minimum, with the elements of torture.
• The elements of intent and purpose in article 1 do not involve a subjective inquiry into
the motivations of the perpetrators, but rather must be objective determinations under
the circumstances. It is essential to investigate and establish the responsibility of
persons in the chain of command as well as that of the direct perpetrator(s).
• By defining the offence of torture as distinct from common assault or other crimes, the
Committee considers that States parties will directly advance the Convention’s
overarching aim of preventing torture and ill-treatment. Naming and defining this
crime will promote the Convention’s aim, inter alia, by alerting everyone, including
perpetrators, victims, and the public, to the special gravity of the crime of torture.
 GENERAL COMMENT NO. 2

• Scope of State obligations and responsibility:

• States bear international responsibility for the acts and omissions of their officials and
others, including agents, private contractors, and others acting in official capacity or
acting on behalf of the State, in conjunction with the State, under its direction or
control, or otherwise under colour of law.
• Each State party should prohibit, prevent and redress torture and ill-treatment in all
contexts of custody or control.
• “any territory” includes all areas where the State party exercises, directly or indirectly,
in whole or in part, de jure or de facto effective control, in accordance with
international law.
 GENERAL COMMENT NO. 2

• Scope of State obligations and responsibility:

• Where State authorities or others acting in official capacity or under colour of law,
know or have reasonable grounds to believe that acts of torture or ill-treatment are
being committed by non-State officials or private actors and they fail to exercise due
diligence to prevent, investigate, prosecute and punish such non-State officials or
private actors consistently with the Convention, the State bears responsibility and its
officials should be considered as authors, complicit or otherwise responsible under the
Convention for consenting to or acquiescing in such impermissible acts.
• The State’s indifference or inaction provides a form of encouragement and/or de facto
permission.
 GENERAL COMMENT NO. 2

• Protection for individuals and groups made vulnerable by discrimination or

marginalization:
• The protection of certain minority or marginalized individuals or populations
especially at risk of torture is a part of the obligation to prevent torture or ill-treatment.
• States parties should ensure the protection of members of groups especially at risk of
being tortured, by fully prosecuting and punishing all acts of violence and abuse
against these individuals and ensuring implementation of other positive measures of
prevention and protection.
• Eliminating employment discrimination and conducting ongoing sensitization training
in contexts where torture or ill-treatment is likely to be committed is also key to
preventing such violations and building a culture of respect for women and minorities.
 GENERAL COMMENT NO. 2

• Other preventive measures:

• Articles 3 to 15 of the Convention constitute specific preventive measures that the States
parties deemed essential to prevent torture and ill-treatment, particularly in custody or
detention.
• The obligation to take effective preventive measures transcends the items enumerated
specifically in the Convention or the demands of the general comment.
• Superior orders:
• An order of a superior or public authority can never be invoked as a justification of torture.
• Subordinates may not seek refuge in superior authority and should be held to account
individually.
• Those exercising superior authority - including public officials - cannot avoid accountability or
escape criminal responsibility for torture or ill-treatment committed by subordinates where
they knew or should have known that such impermissible conduct was occurring, or was likely
to occur, and they failed to take reasonable andnecessary preventive measures.
 OTHER RELATED INTERNATIONAL
INSTRUMENTS

• UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Mandela Rules)

• UN Standard Minimum Rules for Non-Custodial Measures (Tokyo Rules)
 UN STANDARD MINIMUM RULES FOR THE
TREATMENT OF PRISONERS (MANDELA RULES)

• Rule I. All persons shall be treated with respect due to their inherent dignity. No
prisoner shall be subjected to torture or CIDTP.
• Rule 2. No discrimination. Prison administration shall take into account individual
needs of prisoners. Measures to protect and promote rights of prisoners with special
needs shall not be deemed discriminatory.
• Rule 3. The prison system shall not, except as incidental to justifiable separation or
the maintenance of discipline, aggravate the suffering inherent in such a situation.
• Rule 4. Imprisonment should be done for the purpose of protection of society, to
reduce recidivism, and reintegration of prisoners into society when released. Prison
administration should offer education, vocational training, and work.
 UN STANDARD MINIMUM RULES FOR THE
TREATMENT OF PRISONERS (MANDELA RULES)

• Rule 5. Prison administrations shall make all reasonable accommodation and

adjustments to ensure that prisoners with physical, mental or other disabilities have
full and effective access to prison life on an equitable basis.
• Rule 11. Separation of prisoners under different categories into different institutions
or part of institutions.
• Men and women should be separate.
• Untried and convicted prisoners should be separate.
• Persons imprisoned for debt and other civil prisoners should be separate with those convicted
of a criminal offense.
• Young prisoners separate from adults
 UN STANDARD MINIMUM RULES FOR THE
TREATMENT OF PRISONERS (MANDELA RULES)

• Rule 12. Each prisoner shall occupy by night a cell to himself. If dormitory,
prisoners should be carefully selected to associate with one another.
• Rule 13. Sleeping accommodation shall meet all requirements of health.
• Rule 14. In places where prisoners are required to live or work:
• Windows should be large enough to allow prisoners to read and work by the light, and
allow for fresh air.
• Artificial light shall be provided
• Rule 15. Clean and decent sanitary installations.
• Rule 16. Adequate bathing and shower installations
 UN STANDARD MINIMUM RULES FOR THE
TREATMENT OF PRISONERS (MANDELA RULES)

• Rule 18. Prisoners shall be provided with water and toilet articles necessary for
health and cleanliness, and facilities for proper care of hair and beard.
• Rule 19. Prisoners shall be provided with adequate outfit of clothing which are
clean and kept in proper condition.
• Rule 21. Prisoners shall be provided with a separate bed which shall be clean
and kept in good order.
• Rule 22. Prisoners shall be provided with food at the usual hours with sufficient
nutritional value, wholesome quality, well-prepared and served. Drinking water
shall also be provided.
 UN STANDARD MINIMUM RULES FOR THE
TREATMENT OF PRISONERS (MANDELA RULES)

• Rule 23. Prisoners shall have at least 1 hour of suitable exercise in open air
daily
• Rule 24. Prisoners shall enjoy same standards of healthcare that are available in
the community.
• Rule 27. Prisoners shall have prompt access to medical attention in urgent
cases.
• Rule 28. There shall be special accommodation for women for all necessary
prenatal and postnatal care and treatment.
 UN STANDARD MINIMUM RULES FOR THE
TREATMENT OF PRISONERS (MANDELA RULES)

• Rule 30. A qualified health-care professional shall examine every prisoner with
special attention to:
• Any ill-treatment that arriving prisoners may have been subjected prior to admission
• Rule 34. Healthcare professionals shall document and report any signs of
torture or CIDTP to competent medical, admin., or judicial authority.
• Rule 36. Discipline and order shall be maintained with no more restriction than
is necessary to ensure safe custody, the secure operation of the prison and a
well ordered community life.
 UN STANDARD MINIMUM RULES FOR THE
TREATMENT OF PRISONERS (MANDELA RULES)

• Rule 43. 1. In no circumstances may restrictions or disciplinary sanctions amount to torture or

other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The following practices, in
particular, shall be prohibited:
• (a) Indefinite solitary confinement;
• (b) Prolonged solitary confinement;
• (c) Placement of a prisoner in a dark or constantly lit cell;
• (d) Corporal punishment or the reduction of a prisoner’s diet or drinking water;
• (e) Collective punishment.
• II. Instruments of restraints shall never be applied as a sanction as well.
• III. Disciplinary sanctions or restrictive measures shall not include the prohibition of family
contact. The means of family contact may only be restricted for a limited time period and as
strictly required for the maintenance of security and order.
 UN STANDARD MINIMUM RULES FOR THE
TREATMENT OF PRISONERS (MANDELA RULES)

• Rule 44. Solitary confinement shall refer to the confinement of prisoners for 22
hours or more a day without meaningful human contact. Prolonged solitary
confinement shall refer to solitary confinement for a time period in excess of
15 consecutive days.
• Rule 45 1. Solitary confinement shall be used only in exceptional cases as a
last resort, for as short a time as possible and subject to independent review,
and only pursuant to the authorization by a competent authority. It shall not be
imposed by virtue of a prisoner’s sentence.
 UN STANDARD MINIMUM RULES FOR THE
TREATMENT OF PRISONERS (MANDELA RULES)

• Rule 47. 1. The use of chains, irons or other instruments of restraint which are
inherently degrading or painful shall be prohibited.
• 2. Other instruments of restraint shall only be used when authorized by law and
in the following circumstances:
• (a) As a precaution against escape during a transfer, provided that they are removed
when the prisoner appears before a judicial or administrative authority;
• (b) By order of the prison director, if other methods of control fail, in order to prevent
a prisoner from injuring himself or herself or others or from damaging property; in
such instances, the director shall immediately alert the physician or other qualified
health-care professionals and report to the higher administrative authority.
 UN STANDARD MINIMUM RULES FOR THE
TREATMENT OF PRISONERS (MANDELA RULES)

• Rule 50. The laws and regulations governing searches of prisoners and cells shall
be in accordance with obligations under international law and shall take into
account international standards and norms, keeping in mind the need to ensure
security in the prison. Searches shall be conducted in a manner that is respectful of
the inherent human dignity and privacy of the individual being searched, as well
as the principles of proportionality, legality and necessity.
• Rule 51. Searches shall not be used to harass, intimidate or unnecessarily intrude
upon a prisoner’s privacy. For the purpose of accountability, the prison
administration shall keep appropriate records of searches, in particular strip and
body cavity searches and searches of cells, as well as the reasons for the searches,
the identities of those who conducted them and any results of the searches.
 UN STANDARD MINIMUM RULES FOR THE
TREATMENT OF PRISONERS (MANDELA RULES)

• Rule 58 1. Prisoners shall be allowed, under necessary supervision, to

communicate with their family and friends at regular intervals:
• (a) By corresponding in writing and using, where available, telecommunication,
electronic, digital and other means; and
• (b) By receiving visits.
• Rule 60. 1. Admission of visitors to the prison facility is contingent upon the
visitor’s consent to being searched. The visitor may withdraw his or her
consent at any time, in which case the prison administration may refuse access.
• 2. Search and entry procedures for visitors shall not be degrading
 UN STANDARD MINIMUM RULES FOR THE
TREATMENT OF PRISONERS (MANDELA RULES)

• Rule 64. Every prison shall have a library for the use of all categories of
prisoners, adequately stocked with both recreational and instructional books,
and prisoners shall be encouraged to make full use of it.
• Rule 66. So far as practicable, every prisoner shall be allowed to satisfy the
needs of his or her religious life by attending the services provided in the
prison and having in his or her possession the books of religious observance
and instruction of his or her denomination.
 U N S TA N D A R D M I N I M U M RU L ES F O R N O N -
C U S TO D I A L M E A S U R E S ( TO K Y O R U L ES )

• Objective: For member States to develop non-custodial measures within their

legal systems to reduce the use of imprisonment.
• Scope: applies to all persons subject to prosecution, trial, or execution of
sentence at all stages of the administration of criminal justice.
 U N S TA N D A R D M I N I M U M RU L ES F O R N O N -
C U S TO D I A L M E A S U R E S ( TO K Y O R U L ES )

• At the pre-trial and when appropriate:

• The police, the prosecution service or other agencies dealing with criminal cases
should be empowered to discharge the offender if they consider that it is not necessary
to proceed with the case for the protection of society, crime prevention or the
promotion of respect for the law and the rights of victims.
• Pre-trial detention shall be used as a last resort.
 U N S TA N D A R D M I N I M U M RU L ES F O R N O N -
C U S TO D I A L M E A S U R E S ( TO K Y O R U L ES )

• Sentencing dispositions:
• The judicial authority, having at its disposal a range of non-custodial measures, should
take into consideration in making its decision the rehabilitative needs of the offender,
the protection of society and the interests of the victim, who should be consulted
whenever appropriate.
• Post-sentencing dispositions:
• The competent authority shall have at its disposal a wide range of post-sentencing
alternatives in order to avoid institutionalization and to assist offenders in their early
reintegration into society.
 U N S TA N D A R D M I N I M U M RU L ES F O R N O N -
C U S TO D I A L M E A S U R E S ( TO K Y O R U L ES )

• Implementation and supervision of non-custodial measures:

• The purpose of supervision is to reduce reoffending and to assist the offender’s
integration into society in a way which minimizes the likelihood of a return to crime.
• Breach of conditions:
• A breach of the conditions to be observed by the offender may result in a modification
or revocation of the non-custodial measure.
 LOCAL LEGISLATURE ON TORTURE

• Article III, Section 12, 1987 Constitution:

• …” (2) No torture, force, violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means which vitiate the free will shall be
used against him. Secret detention places, solitary, incommunicado, or other similar forms of detention are
prohibited.
• (3) Any confession or admission obtained in violation of this or Section 17 hereof shall be inadmissible in
evidence against him.
• (4) The law shall provide for penal and civil sanctions for violations of this section as well as compensation to
and rehabilitation of victims of torture or similar practices, and their families.”

• Article III, Section 19, 1987 Constitution:

• Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall death
penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides
for it. Any death penalty already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.
• (2) The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading punishment against any prisoner or detainee or the
use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities under subhuman conditions shall be dealt with by law.
• Republic Act No. 9745, Anti-Torture Act of 2009.
 THE ANTI-TORTURE ACT OF 2009

• Section 3, Definitions:
• (a) "Torture" refers to an act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or
mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from
him/her or a third person information or a confession; punishing him/her for an act
he/she or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed; or
intimidating or coercing him/her 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 person in authority or agent of a
person in authority. It does not include pain or Buffering arising only from, inherent in
or incidental to lawful sanctions.
• (b) "Other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment" refers to a
deliberate and aggravated treatment or punishment not enumerated under Section 4 of
this Act, inflicted by a person in authority or agent of a person in authority against a
person under his/her custody, which attains a level of severity causing suffering, gross
humiliation or debasement to the latter.
 THE ANTI-TORTURE ACT OF 2009

• Section 4. Acts of Torture. - For purposes of this Act, torture shall include, but
not be limited to, the following:
• (a) Physical torture is a form of treatment or punishment inflicted by a person in
authority or agent of a person in authority upon another in his/her custody that causes
severe pain, exhaustion, disability or dysfunction of one or more parts of the body
• (b) "Mental/Psychological Torture" refers to acts committed by a person in authority or
agent of a person in authority which are calculated to affect or confuse the mind and/or
undermine a person's dignity and morale,
 THE ANTI-TORTURE ACT OF 2009

• Section 5. Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment. -

Other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment refers to a
deliberate and aggravated treatment or punishment not enumerated under
Section 4 of this Act, inflicted by a person in authority or agent of a person in
authority against another person in custody, which attains a level of severity
sufficient to cause suffering, gross humiliation or debasement to the latter. The
assessment of the level of severity shall depend on all the circumstances of the
case, including the duration of the treatment or punishment, its physical and
mental effects and, in some cases, the sex, religion, age and state of health of
the victim.
 THE ANTI-TORTURE ACT OF 2009

• Section 6. Freedom from Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading
Treatment or Punishment, An Absolute Bight. - Torture and other cruel,
inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment as criminal acts shall apply to
all circumstances. A state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability,
or any other public emergency, or a document or any determination comprising
an "order of battle" shall not and can never be invoked as a justification for
torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment.
• Section 8. Exclusion as evidence any confession, admission, or statement
obtained as a result of torture except against a person accused of torture.
 THE ANTI-TORTURE ACT OF 2009

• Section 13. Criminal Liability.

• Those who actually participated, or induced another, or who cooperated, shall be liable
as principal
• A superior officer who orders torture or ill-treatment shall be liable as principal.
• The immediate commanding officer shall be held liable as principal if s/he knew or
should have known that torture/CIDTP was committed or is being committed in his
area of responsibility, and did not take action before, during, or immediately after its
commission.