Ill-treatment [1]

Torture and ill-treatment are two related terms that embody human rights violations. Ill-treatment can be defined as cruel or inhuman treatment and can take many different forms. Torture is considered as the most extreme form of ill-treatment.

The main international texts that refer to ill-treatment and torture are:

Ill-treatment is legally referred to as cruel treatment, and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, causing varying degrees of suffering less severe than in the case of torture. There is general agreement that torture is characterised by and distinguished from other forms of ill-treatment by the degree of suffering involved, and that forms of ill-treatment other than torture do not have to be inflicted for a specific purpose, though there does have to be an intent to expose individuals to the conditions that amount to, or result in, ill-treatment.

The essential elements constituting ill-treatment that does not amount to torture are [2]: intentional exposure to significant mental or physical pain or suffering; and by or with the consent or acquiescence of the state authorities.

International law also makes clear that all acts of ill-treatment refer to the actions and violations committed by state agents, not by non-state agents, and that lawful sanctions do not constitute ill-treatment in any form, as long as they do not include the methods and acts referred to as constituting ill-treatment.

In order for international bodies to distinguish among the different forms of ill-treatment and assess the degree of suffering involved, attention is focused on the circumstances of each case and the particular victim. This makes it difficult to identify the exact boundaries between the different forms of ill-treatment, because the circumstances and victims will vary. However, it makes the law more flexible because it can adapt to each case.

All forms of ill-treatment are prohibited under international law. This means that even when treatment is not considered severe enough, in legal terms, to amount to torture, the state may still be found to have violated the prohibition on ill-treatment. In any case, ill-treatment is unconditionally prohibited, even during emergencies or armed conflicts.

Forms of ill-treatment that have been found to amount to torture, either alone or in combination with other forms of treatment, include falaka/falanga (beatings on the soles of the feet), severe forms of beatings, electric shocks, rape, and mock executions [3]. There are also many “grey areas” that do not clearly amount to torture, though are clearly acts of ill-treatment, or about which there is still disagreement. Examples include corporal punishment imposed as a judicial penalty, solitary confinement, certain aspects of poor prison conditions, and disappearances. Examples of ill-treatment not amounting to torture were studied in the Metagora activity carried out in Mexico, and include such acts as law enforcement personnel threatening to harm family and relatives, some forms of hitting and insulting, and illegal detention and lack of communication with the outside world.

The main difference between torture and ill-treatment is technical and legal, based on the severity of the violation and the motives for each violation, which are not always easily defined [4].

1. This definition is based on Giffard, C., The Torture Reporting Handbook: How to Document and Respond to Allegations of Torture within the International System for the Protection of Human Rights, The Human Rights Centre, University of Essex, 2000, www.essex.ac.uk/torturehandbook/english.htm (24 December 2006). Please refer to this article for more detailed information.

2. Ibid, section 3.3.2.

3. Ibid, section 3.3.3.2.

4. Further recommended reading: The Protocol of Istanbul.