01200821
E350/8
Chamber issued the full reasons for its decision.] The SCC Decision examines Article 15 of
the CAT and provides guidance on many of the issues raised by the parties before the Trial
Chamber as to the permissible uses of evidence alleged to be tainted by torture.
3.
The Chamber notes that the findings in the SCC Decision are largely limited to the
evidence sought to be used during the July 2015 Supreme Court Chamber hearings, namely
several S-21 documents. 2 Furthermore, because of the scope of Case 002/01, the Supreme
Court Chamber did not interpret the exception contained in Article 15 of the CAT for
statements "against a person accused of torture" nor did it examine the applicability of these
principles to documents from Kraing Ta Chan and other security centres, apart from S-21. 3
This decision therefore examines the issue of torture-tainted evidence in a holistic fashion,
addressing each of the issues presented in the case currently at trial.
2. SUBMISSIONS
2.1. The Co-Prosecutors' Submissions
4.
The Co-Prosecutors submit that Article 15 of the CAT must be interpreted in light of the
CAT's objective to abolish the use of torture as well as the obligation it creates to prosecute
perpetrators oftorture. 4 Article 15 of the CAT expressly provides for the admission of torturetainted statements against the person accused of torture in order to prove that the statement
was made. 5 It otherwise excludes torture-tainted statements from legal proceedings because
such statements are unreliable. 6 However, this reasoning does not apply where such
statements are used for purposes other than establishing the truth of their contents. 7 The
exclusionary rule is intended to prevent the torturer from accruing any benefit from the
illegally obtained statement. 8
Decision on Objections to Document Lists (Full Reasons), F26/12, 31 December 2015 ("SCC Decision"),
paras 30, 67.
2
SCC Decision, disposition para. 5 ("The parties may not use D312.2.25-D36617.1.1.8, E3/1682, E3/1855,
E3/2792, E3/3857, E3/3989, E3/4202 because they are likely statements obtained through the use of torture");
See Also, SCC Decision, para. 30, para. 65 ("At issue here is whether the S-21 Statements may be used during
the July 2015 Hearing for the limited purpose of examining three witnesses on appeal.")
3
SCC Decision, para. 27, 30, 67, FN 54.
4
Co-Prosecutors' Submission Regarding the Application of the Torture Convention to S-21 Confessions and
Other Records Relating to Interrogations of Prisoners, E350/1, 21 May 2015 ("Co-Prosecutors' Submissions"),
paras 2-3; T. 25 May 2015, pp. 4-5, 16.
Co-Prosecutors' Submissions, paras 3, 7.
6
Co-Prosecutors' Submissions, paras 4-5; T. 25 May 2015, p. 4.
7
Co-Prosecutors' Submissions, paras 3, 5, 7; T. 25 May 2015, pp. 7-8, 15-16.
Co-Prosecutors' Submissions, paras 4,6; T. 25 May 2015, pp. 5-6.
Decision on Evidence Obtained through Torture, Public, 5 February 2016
3