Preventing Torture An Operational Guide for National Human Rights Institutions - Updated Edition Introduction for users The Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions (APF) and the Association for the Prevention of Torture (APT) are pleased to present the updated edition of the 2010 Preventing Torture: An Operational Guide for National Human Rights Institutions. This revised edition integrates gender considerations and developments related to torture prevention. This Guide aims to support and strengthen the work of national human rights institutions (NHRIs) – whether they are human rights commissions or ombudsman offices – in the prevention of torture, especially NHRIs that are fully compliant with the Paris Principles.1 While NHRIs that do not fully comply with the Paris Principles can still play an important role in the prevention of torture, fully compliant NHRIs are more able to engage in this preventive work with legitimacy, credibility and, therefore, with greater effectiveness.2 Rationale NHRIs are a vital part of strong national human rights protection systems and play a key role in linking the international and domestic human rights systems. Their mandate means that they can engage with all relevant actors at the national level, as well as interact with international mechanisms, in order to contribute to the prevention of torture. Although NHRIs have broad mandates which require them to protect and promote all human rights for all persons, there are strong arguments for NHRIs to devote special attention to the prevention of torture. Torture is one of the most horrendous violations of a person’s human rights. It is an attack on the very essence of a person’s dignity. Family members and relatives of the victims are also directly affected as they may experience psychological trauma from the act of torture inflicted to their beloved ones. Torture also has a harmful impact on the society at large, as it corrupts the States that use it, degrades the legal system that accepts it and undermines the trust in State institutions. Such a practice has no place in a society that preserves human dignity and respects the rule of law and human rights. However, while there is an absolute prohibition on torture under international law, it continues to be widely practiced in all parts of the world. Combating torture therefore requires the active involvement of many actors, including NHRIs. A focus on prevention can present both challenges and opportunities for NHRIs. Most NHRIs operate predominantly as “reactive” bodies that respond to complaints brought to them by individuals or organizations, rather than initiating investigations or other preventive actions. While moving from this reactive focus can be challenging, it is important to note that NHRIs do have a mandate to undertake preventive actions, such as promoting legal reform, running training programmes and raising public awareness. Placing greater emphasis on torture prevention therefore offers NHRIs the opportunity to strike a balance between the different aspects of their mandate and to engage in preventive actions in a more strategic way. 6 1 Principles relating to the status of national institutions for the promotion and protection of human rights (General Assembly resolution 48/134 of 20 December 1993). 2 As of May 2021, there are 117 NHRIs worldwide that are members of the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI); 84 of which are accredited as being fully in compliance with the Paris Principles. Compliance is assessed through a peer-based accreditation process carried out by GANHRI, through the Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA), under the auspices of OHCHR. NHRIs that are deemed to fully comply with the Paris Principles are accredited with “A status” and enjoy special standing at the international level, in recognition of their legitimacy and effectiveness.