The United 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 Impunity is 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 beneficiaries. 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 define 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 defined 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 state’s 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 definition 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 specific 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 Mubarak’s 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 officers 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 fine.

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 flagging 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 findings to relevant authorities, and provides minimum stan-dards for a state’s 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 fight 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 fighting 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 flagship project ended in 2012, the IRCT reaffirmed 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.