Citation

Draminsky Petersen H. Torture 2019; 29(2): 96-102.

Affiliation

Ex-member and vice-chair of the UN Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture (SPT). Correspondence to: hdp@dadlnet.dk.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2019, International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims)

DOI

10.7146/torture.v29i2.116128

PMID

31670708

Abstract

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.

Language: en