The fact-finding missions of the special rapporteur on torture

Abstract

This article examines a vital element of the special rapporteur on torture's (SRT) mandate that of monitoring and the reports that have been produced as a result of fact-finding missions (FFMs). Over a 25 year period, the SRTs have visited 47 states and the reports present an interesting mosaic of the diversity of state compliance with regard to the prohibition itself and also the terms of reference of state visits. The reports reveal not only the unequalled access that the SRTs have had to places of detention and systems that foster torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment but also that the impact of monitoring is enhanced by the public reporting of these missions. However this article argues that there is a need to develop further follow-up FFMs mechanisms to place pressure on states to implement the recommendations of the SRT. The following examines the individual reports of states between 1985 and September 2010 to consider the reported challenges that have faced the SRTs in relation to their FFMs. IntroductionThe main challenge now facing human rights bodies is effective monitoring of states. 1 The shift of emphasis from norm development towards identifying compliance with human rights obligations is in many ways a seismic one and presents an on-going challenge. Given that states are eager to denounce torture, but many are found to be directly involved or complicit in its practice, the special procedures have a vital role to play in uncovering the phenomena of torture from its subterranean depths.This article will argue that the capacity of the special rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment (SRT) 2 to access, observe and report on individual legal and administrative systems for the purposes of his mandate relies heavily on fact-finding missions (FFMs). Effective FFMs place the SRT in a unique position for monitoring purposes. The following will examine the individual mission reports of 47 states visited by the SRT over a 25-year period in order to explore the nature of fact-finding that has had to develop in line with the challenges by the numerous methods and settings that torture manifests itself. The aim is not only to understand the characteristics of fact-finding, given that opposition from states is often manifest, but also explore how monitoring may be progressed. Individual SRTs have written about their experiences on FFMs in their reports and in journal articles, but this article's focus is an objective one that seeks to question the credibility of FFMs by examining the reports themselves.The objective of FFMs is to gather information in order to assess states' implementation of the obligations under the prohibition and recommend to governments measures to eradicate torture and other ill treatment. The SRT is able to examine closely environments that foster the practice of torture and make specific recommendations accordingly.The following examines the FFM reports of the four special rapporteurs on torture over a 25-year per...

The role of the special rapporteurs of the United Nations Human Rights Council in the development and promotion of international human rights norms

“…By contrast, Amrita Mukherjee focuses on the fact-finding missions of the special rapporteur on torture, locating the mandate in the wider UN system and examining the various fact-finding missions. 10 The analysis highlights the role and importance of fact-finding missions, its strengths and weaknesses.…”