–3–
treatment come to the notice of prosecutorial or judicial authorities, they should be especially
careful not to accord undue importance to the absence of physical marks. The same applies
a fortiori when the ill-treatment alleged is predominantly of a psychological nature (sexual
humiliation, threats to the life or physical integrity of the person detained and/or his family, etc.).
Adequately assessing the veracity of allegations of ill-treatment may well require taking evidence
from all persons concerned and arranging in good time for on-site inspections and/or specialist
medical examinations.
Whenever criminal suspects brought before prosecutorial or judicial authorities allege illtreatment, those allegations should be recorded in writing, a forensic medical examination
(including, if appropriate, by a forensic psychiatrist) should be immediately ordered, and the
necessary steps taken to ensure that the allegations are properly investigated. Such an approach
should be followed whether or not the person concerned bears visible external injuries. Even in the
absence of an express allegation of ill-treatment, a forensic medical examination should be
requested whenever there are other grounds to believe that a person could have been the victim of
ill-treatment.
30.
It is also important that no barriers should be placed between persons who allege illtreatment (who may well have been released without being brought before a prosecutor or judge)
and doctors who can provide forensic reports recognised by the prosecutorial and judicial
authorities. For example, access to such a doctor should not be made subject to prior authorisation
by an investigating authority.
31.
The CPT has had occasion, in a number of its visit reports, to assess the activities of the
authorities empowered to conduct official investigations and bring criminal or disciplinary charges
in cases involving allegations of ill-treatment. In so doing, the Committee takes account of the case
law of the European Court of Human Rights as well as the standards contained in a panoply of
international instruments. It is now a well established principle that effective investigations,
capable of leading to the identification and punishment of those responsible for ill-treatment, are
essential to give practical meaning to the prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment
or punishment.
Complying with this principle implies that the authorities responsible for investigations are
provided with all the necessary resources, both human and material. Further, investigations must
meet certain basic criteria.
32.
For an investigation into possible ill-treatment to be effective, it is essential that the persons
responsible for carrying it out are independent from those implicated in the events. In certain
jurisdictions, all complaints of ill-treatment against the police or other public officials must be
submitted to a prosecutor, and it is the latter – not the police – who determines whether a
preliminary investigation should be opened into a complaint; the CPT welcomes such an approach.
However, it is not unusual for the day-to-day responsibility for the operational conduct of an
investigation to revert to serving law enforcement officials. The involvement of the prosecutor is
then limited to instructing those officials to carry out inquiries, acknowledging receipt of the result,
and deciding whether or not criminal charges should be brought. It is important to ensure that the
officials concerned are not from the same service as those who are the subject of the investigation.
Ideally, those entrusted with the operational conduct of the investigation should be completely
independent from the agency implicated. Further, prosecutorial authorities must exercise close and
effective supervision of the operational conduct of an investigation into possible ill-treatment by
public officials. They should be provided with clear guidance as to the manner in which they are
expected to supervise such investigations.