TheUnited Nations International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, on 26 June, gives us the opportunity to

stand united and remind the world that torture is a cruel violation of human rights.
Fighting Impunityis the theme for the 26 June 2014 campaign. The campaign theme has been chosen by IRCT mem-
ber centres around the world who voted on their preferred theme.
In all regions of the world, crimes of torture are committed
every day against men, women and children. In most cases,
no one is prosecuted and punished for them.
These crimes are committed with impunity. Impunity is the
failure of the state to fully investigate violations; to bring to
justice and punish perpetrators; to provide victims with ef-
fective remedies; and to take all necessary steps to prevent
the violation to happen again.
Impunity means that nothing prevents torturers from repeat-
ing their crimes. It sends a clear message to torturers that
their crimes are tolerable. In a climate of impunity, crimes of
torture can be safely committed without perpetrators having
to risk arrest, prosecution or punishment. When torturers are
not punished, there is a risk that torture will generate into a
widespread or systematic crime perpetrated by many.
Impunity for torturers prevents victims of torture to
see justice done. Firm and well-established interna-
tional legal norms prescribe for torture victims three
fundamental rights: the right to know, the right to jus-
tice, and the right to reparations. In this regard crimi-
nal trials can be well suited to facilitate the truth about
what happened in alleged cases of torture and are an
essential forum to provide victims of torture compen-
sation and other reparations. In turn victims of torture
giving witness testimonies can contribute to bringing
perpetrators to justice.
Torture victims have the right to be given the
opportunity to establish the truth with regard
to the facts surrounding the crime of torture.
Having their story heard is an essential element
in the rehabilitation of survivors. Furthermore,
the right to know does not only concern the
individual victim, it is also a collective right, as
torture does not only affect the individual but
entire families, communities and the society
as a whole. States must facilitate access to
the facts of the crimes committed, in order to
preserve the knowledge of the oppression that
people have lived through, and ensure that the
facts of history are not distorted.
The right to justice entails obligations
for the state to investigate and pros-
ecute cases of torture. Although the
decision to prosecute is initially a state
responsibility, supplementary victims
should also be enabled to be informed
of the process and institute proceed-
ings themselves.
The crime of torture, as any human
rights violation gives rise to a right
to reparation on the part of the vic-
tims or their benefciaries. This im-
plies a duty on the part of the state
to provide adequate reparations
and the possibility for victims to
seek redress from the perpetra-
tors. (For more information see
the IRCT fact sheet About Rep-
aration)
Violations must be fully, promptly, impartially and
thoroughly investigated, perpetrators prosecuted
and if their guilt is established punished accord-
ingly. Under international law, i.e. according to the
UN Convention against Torture, states are obliged
to investigate alleged crimes of torture and to bring
perpetrators to justice. Furthermore, a set of princi-
ples to combat impunity (Orentlicher Principles) has
been established to further defne the obligations of
states and rights of victims. States are required to
take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or
other measures to prevent acts of torture. They have
to assure that all acts of torture are defned as crimi-
nal offences under national penal law and that these
offences are punishable by appropriate sanctions.
According to international law, any state has the
right and the duty to effectively investigate, prose-
cute and punish an alleged perpetrator who is pres-
ent on the territory under the states jurisdiction. The
UN Convention against Torture has included torture
among the crimes for which universal jurisdiction
has to be exercised. The rule is for the state par-
ties either to prosecute the alleged perpetrator or, in
case the state on which territory the latter is present
is not able to prosecute, must extradite the perpe-
trator. There should be no safe havens for alleged
torturers.
If states do not comply with these obligations, they
breach fundamental norms of international law and
fail to comply with the fundamental rule of law. Fur-
thermore, states that allow impunity for torturers lose
their credibility to encourage other states to honour
their international obligations.
There are obstacles on multiple levels to ending im-
punity. All too often simply the political will is lack-
ing to fully investigate crimes of torture and to bring
perpetrators to justice. Further obstacles to effective
prosecution and rendering justice include:
The lack of including torture as a crime in na-
tional penal codes according to the defnition of
the UN Convention against Torture;
The extensive application of immunities;
The application of statutes of limitations;
The hesitance to extradite alleged perpetrators;
and
The hesitance of courts to apply international
law and the principles of universal jurisdiction.
Impunity can also result from inadequate knowledge
of how to investigate and document cases of torture.
In this matter, many health and legal professionals
have little or no training. They simply do not hold the
specifc technical skills and knowledge required for
cases of torture to be investigated and documented
effectively.
Impunity for the crimes of torture is a major prob-
lem around the world today. The Arab Spring up-
risings were, in great part, a response to years
of impunity. And as the protests unfolded in the
many of the northern African countries claiming for
change, the culture of impunity was further exac-
erbated by emergency laws that empowered the
police to systematically use violence to disperse
the crowds, only to cause even bigger demonstra-
tions. Abuses were committed; but few perpetra-
tors were punished. In Mubaraks Egypt, countless
victims of torture were left short of reparation, and
reports detailed the systemic failure to ensure
that perpetrators were investigated and criminally
prosecuted. According to publically available sta-
tistics, between 2006 and 2009, Egyptian courts
had sentenced only six police offcers for torture
and inhumane treatment, despite hundreds of al-
legations. Figures from Turkey show that impunity
for torturers is the rule rather than the exception.
Since 1980, approximately one million persons
have been tortured in Turkey, but only a few thou-
sand perpetrators have been convicted. And in
nearly all cases punishment was either post-
poned or converted into a fne.
But the lack of punishment for the crimes
of torture is not a problem of North Af-
rica and Turkey alone. From the USA to
India, from Mexico to Moldova, human
rights organisations have been fagging
widespread impunity for years. Yet, the
problem remains. Impunity remains an
important impediment for the pre-
vention of torture.
The Manual on the Effective Investigation and Documen-
tation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment (the Istanbul Protocol) is the lead-
ing international instrument for the effective investigation
and documentation of torture. The Istanbul Protocol con-
tains guidelines for the investigation and documentation of
alleged cases of torture and ill treatment and for reporting
fndings to relevant authorities, and provides minimum stan-
dards for a states compliance to guarantee the effective
documentation of torture.
The Istanbul Protocol is an important contribution to end
impunity for torturers and provide reparations to victims. In-
creasing the capacity for investigation and documentation,
when coupled with assurances of safety and transparency,
has the potential to bring about a marked increase in the
number of torture cases reported. This will then enable the
provision of authoritative documentation on the prevalence
of torture, and increasingly, put pressure on governments
to take action to punish the perpetrators of torture. This will
also enable torture victims to seek justice and to obtain rep-
aration.
From 2003 until 2009, the IRCT, in collaboration with the
Human Rights Foundation of Turkey, Physicians for Human
Rights, REDRESS Trust, and the World Medical Association
as well as a range of national partners in ten countries, im-
plemented the project Prevention through Documentation
to promote the value and use of the Istanbul Protocol www.
preventingtorture.org).
The overall objective of the project was to strengthen the
fght against torture and impunity through increased and
improved investigation, documentation and reporting.
From 2009 until 2012, the IRCT, in collaboration with the
Department of Forensic Medicine of the University of Co-
penhagen and four rehabilitation centres within the IRCT
network, continued fghting impunity. This project, named
FEAT Forensic Evidence Against Torture, aimed to en-
sure reparation for survivors of torture and hold perpetra-
tors accountable by generating medical forensic evidence
that can be used in the prosecution of alleged torture cases
in national, regional and international courts. Although this
fagship project ended in 2012, the IRCT reaffrmed medi-
co-legal documentation as a focus area of work. Through
the International Forensic Expert Group (IFEG) and future
planned activities, the IRCT will continue to stand as a hub
of expertise on medical documentation and promotion of
the Istanbul Protocol. Through IFEG, the IRCT has to date
provided support to more than 70 forensic examinations in
torture investigations cases.