The Convention Against Torture Article 1 defines torture as intentional infliction of severe pain or suffering by or with the consent of a public official for a specific purpose. Article 3 ECHR covers a broader category including inhuman or degrading treatment. Human rights experts assess whether documented treatment reaches these thresholds.
The Istanbul Protocol provides standards for documenting torture and ill-treatment. Human rights experts reference these standards when interfacing with medical evidence but do not provide medical diagnoses. Medical experts assess physical and psychological sequelae while human rights experts analyse country torture patterns and return risk.
State versus non-state torture analysis addresses whether the state is able and willing to protect against torture by non-state actors. CAT committee jurisprudence and UK tribunal decisions inform the due diligence standard. Experts assess impunity, institutional accountability, and whether internal relocation provides protection.
Torture in detention, methods documented in the country, and targeting of specific profiles are central themes in expert reports for torture survivor claims and Article 3 deportation cases.
Frequently Asked Questions
How does the CAT apply in UK asylum proceedings?
While the CAT is not directly incorporated into UK domestic law, CAT standards inform Article 3 ECHR analysis and expert assessment of torture risk. CAT committee reports and general comments are authoritative sources for expert evidence.
What is the Istanbul Protocol's role in expert evidence?
The Istanbul Protocol sets documentation standards for torture and ill-treatment. Human rights experts reference it when assessing consistency between claimed experience and country torture patterns, complementing medical expert evidence.