14
0
Observing the state of affairs in the field of torture prevention in Ukraine and the investigation of torture crimes, one cannot help but notice the success of the Ukrainian authorities in reducing the threshold of tolerance for torture and other forms of ill-treatment.
However, alongside these successes, there are often signs that many officials in places of detention consider success to be an axiomatic phenomenon, which is extremely dangerous.
The fight against torture is an ongoing process that should not end with the creation of a video recording system for detainees, the construction of a new prison or a significant reduction in the prison population as a whole. Torture is a social practice that is very easy to reproduce, even in the face of successes in combating it, and it is new people entering the system who can easily adopt it, regardless of their previous principles and attitudes. In fact, Philippe Zimbardo’s experiment has not yet been refuted, despite its criticism: ‘Our ‘prison officers’ were not psychopaths and sadists, but…’. It is this ‘but’ that conceals a great danger.
I would like to recall that in early July 2024, the Council of Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) issued a public statement on Azerbaijan. The statement was made in accordance with Article 10(2) of the Convention establishing the Committee and concerned the Azerbaijani authorities’ continued refusal to cooperate with the CPT.
The CPT’s Report on its visit to Azerbaijan in 2016 can be cited:
«The worst situation was observed at Pre-Trial Detention Facility No. 2 in Ganja, where the delegation was literally inundated with allegations of systematic and severe physical ill-treatment of inmates by staff (severe beatings whilst prisoners were handcuffed to bars in a crucifixion position in the prison’s underground tunnel, sometimes combined with pouring cold water over the prisoners and placing a cold fan in front of them). Allegations were also heard, including from juvenile prisoners, of beatings (truncheon blows) performed in the presence of the establishment’s Director, in his office».
«These allegations were received from numerous inmates interviewed simultaneously, who could not compare their accounts, and there could be little doubt that severe ill-treatment/torture was in fact occurring. The delegation has gathered some medical evidence (including directly observed) corroborating these allegations. It was also obvious to the delegation while interviewing prisoners that they were truly terrorised».
«The above-mentioned situation was compounded by what could clearly be considered inhuman and degrading conditions of detention: very severe overcrowding, obliging inmates to share beds – sometimes three on one bed – or sleep on the floor in totally dilapidated, dirty, dark and poorly ventilated cells, dirty toilets in insufficient number, etc».
Therefore, in the field of torture prevention, successes run the risk of being seen as axiomatic. This is why torture prevention should not only be a set of actions, but also a policy. Otherwise, the examples cited above may appear immediately after successes.
Average Rating