NCHR has a unique and strategic legal position to not only advocate for development of an effective legal framework, but also to bridge the gap between law and practice and ensure implementation of the legal framework. In its investigation regarding torture at Adiala Jail, NCHR team visited the jail on seven occasions and recorded the statement of a number of inmates from different barracks in the facility. Context: Case of Mr. Shahab Hussain On 21.09.22, the Chief Justice of the Islamabad High Court passed an order in Writ Petition No. 3512/2022 filed by Mst. Imtiaz Bibi, and directed the Secretary, Ministry of Human Rights (MoHR), Chairperson, National Commission for Human Rights (NCHR), and the Executive Director, Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS) to send their nominated officers to Central Jail, Rawalpindi to investigate the allegations of custodial torture suffered by the petitioner’s son at the hands of the jail authorities. Thereafter, the nominated officer of NCHR visited Central Jail, Rawalpindi to meet the alleged victim of torture, namely Mr. Shahab Hussain, and recorded his statement. Mr. Shahab claimed that he was subjected to torture on various occasions by jail authorities of Central Jail, Rawalpindi. He claimed that incidents of torture and police brutality were widespread in Central Jail, Rawalpindi, and the prisoners had no forum to take up their grievances. During the visit, interviews of seven other inmates were also conducted. They corroborated Mr. Shahab’s statement adding that they themselves had been subjected to torture and abuse. Their statements have been kept confidential to ensure their safety from jail authorities. On the basis of the statements recorded, NCHR submitted an initial report to the Islamabad High Court noting that the administration of Central Jail, Rawalpindi appears to have committed gross abuse of power and mistreatment of inmates, wherein there were reasonable grounds for conducting further inquiry into the allegations. NCHR also recommended an investigation by a forensic medical examiner as a follow up. The view presented by NCHR was supported by the PIMS medical officer who concluded that the medical examination of Mr. Shahab revealed injury marks - some new and some old. However, he stated that he could not clearly ascertain whether these injuries were selfinflicted or a result of torture. A thorough examination could not be conducted due to unavailability of certain medical equipment. 8