“Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction”. (see other similar requirements in the CAT in Annex 1) Article 1(i) of the CAT defines “torture” as: “…any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.” “Prevent” is among the key elements under the CAT in prohibiting torture. The CAT does not establish prohibitions, but rather it establishes accountability for state parties that fail to take the measures underlined in the Convention. The treaty bodies primarily facilitate the implementation of the fundamental principles of international law that are incorporated into treaties such as the CAT, and they also receive, and respond to, reports from the state parties. The Committee against Torture (hereinafter referred to as the “Committee”) is established under the CAT to monitor the implementation of the Convention by the state parties. In 2002, the UN adopted the Optional Protocol to the CAT which established the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment of the Committee against Torture (hereinafter referred to as the “Subcommittee on Prevention”), an operational body that is given a visitation mandate to inspect places of detention within a structured schedule. The UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, on the other hand, visits upon invitation from the state parties. Both the Committee and the Subcommittee on Prevention do not have enforcement powers, as they are only mandated under the respective Conventions to make recommendations to the state parties. The absence of enforcement powers, however, does not affect their effectiveness, as they have the duty to engage in dialogues and cooperation with the state parties which may be more effective in persuading and in recommending to the Governments on related issues. 5