Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Documentation of torture and the Istanbul Protocol: applied medical ethics

  • Scientific Contribution
  • Published:
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The so-called Istanbul Protocol, a Manual on the Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and other Cruel, Inhumane or Degrading Treatment or Punishment was adopted by the United Nations soon after its completion in 1999 and since then has become an acknowledged standard for documenting cases of alleged torture and other forms of severe maltreatment. In 2009 the “Forum for medicine and human rights” at the Medical Faculty at the University Erlangen-Nuremburg has provided the first German edition of this manual. The article traces back the development of the protocol taking into account the general background as well as the factual occasion of its initiation. The main ethical and legal principles of the manual are introduced as well as the projects for implementing the rules provided in the protocol that have been carried out so far. From this the urgent need for implementation of the Istanbul Protocol guidelines also in Europe and in German-speaking countries and here not exclusively but especially within asylum procedures becomes clear.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. On the various ways in which data can be used that was gained by the medico-legal documentation of torture according to the standards of the Istanbul Protocol (see Frewer et al. 2009 and Furtmayr et al. 2009), especially in treatment centers for torture victims, cf. Mandel and Worm 2007a, b.

  2. The optional protocol obligates contract states to establish national commissions to oversee the UN-Anti-Torture-Convention [CAT]. These commissions are given support by an international subcommittee. The commissions have the right to visit any place where human beings are being held against their will. This includes not only prisons, but also psychiatric wards and transit areas in airports. Furthermore, governments are under obligation to supply the commissions with all requisite information, as for example the reasons for an arrest. Cf. Mahler 2002.

  3. The CAT stipulates, for example, in Art. 2 (2): “No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.”

  4. In the case of Ismail Alan vs. Switzerland, the Committee against Torture determined that ratification alone of the CAT “does not yet state anything about the actual situation in the state in question.” Cf. Weiß 1997.

  5. On the efforts the US Department of Justice undertook in this regard, see for example: Leyendecker 2005. In connection with this, the distinguishing characteristics of torture, inhuman and other cruel and degrading treatment are discussed in Nowak and McArthur 2006.

  6. Because the Istanbul Protocol is recognized as a UN-Document and because it is designated a “protocol,” the impression can arise that it is a legally binding document. Cf. Haagensen 2007.

    Beyond the actual legal obligation to investigate promptly and without bias every suspicion of torture, and to hold those responsible legally accountable, the manual can be accorded a kind of binding force under certain circumstances since it spells out the requisite measures for such procedures. Cf. Battjes 2006.

  7. German language information sources provide mutually inconsistent accounts about the circumstances surrounding the “Case of Baki Erdoğan.” The authors are therefore especially grateful to Dr. Alp Ayan from the Human Rights Foundation of Turkey (HRFT) for additional information and several clarifications. See also: Rauchfuss 2006 and Amnesty International 1994, 1999.

  8. Resolution 55/89 of the General Assembly for December 4th 2000 and resolution 2000/43 of the UNCHR on April 20th 2000.

  9. UN-Professional Training Series No. 8.

    http://www.ohchr.org/EN/PublicationsResources/Pages/TrainingEducation.aspx.

  10. We only reproduce here the main chapters (I–V) and the subchapters (A, B, C, etc.). The next subcategory of the chapter outline (1, 2, 3, etc.) does not appear here for reasons of space. For more, see UN-Professional Training Series No. 8, op.cit. FN 9.

  11. More information is available on the website of the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims: www.irct.org.

  12. For example, the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture pointed out once more in its general recommendations the importance of the principles put forth in the Istanbul Protocol (E/CN.4/2003/68, § 26). Furthermore, the Commission on Human Rights made the request in its resolution on human rights that states employ the manual as a helpful tool in the fight against torture (Human Rights resolution 2003/33 on April 23rd 2003; E/CN.4/2003/L.11/Add.4). See also Ucpinar and Baykal 2006, pp. 256–257.

  13. In September 2003, the World Medical Association issued a “Resolution on the Responsibility of Physicians in the Documentation and Denunciation of Acts of Torture or Cruel or Inhuman or Degrading Treatment.” It contains the recommendation in para. 20[3] to national doctors organizations to “disseminate to physicians the Istanbul Protocol.” Cf. Weltärztebund 2004, p. 251.

  14. On possible reasons for this, cf. Mandel and Worm 2007a, pp. 18–19.

  15. The project group calls itself “Standards zur Begutachtung psychotraumatisierter Menschen“(SBPM). Further information is available on their website: www.sbpm.de/.

  16. In a paper that draws together the articles cited above, Lene Mandel and Lise Worm have presented anew the possible implementation of the medico-legal documentation of cases of torture in accordance with the standards of the Istanbul Protocol even in states where torture is not practiced. Besides asylum procedures, possible uses include: to fight against unpunished perpetrators (through national or international criminal proceedings); to research the consequences of torture and the possible strategies that can be carried out against torture; to support lobbying activities; to support advocacy activities for torture victims; and to further develop methods of documentation. Cf. Mandel and Worm 2006, p. 6 and pp. 11–12.

References

  • Amnesty International. 1994. Jahresbericht 1994. Länderbericht Türkei. http://aidrupal.aspdienste.de/umleitung/1994/deu03/002?lang=de%26mimetype%3dtext%2fhtml. Accessed 17 Oct 2009.

  • Amnesty International. 1999. Turkey—the duty to supervise, investigate and prosecute. http://asiapacific.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGEUR440241999?open&of=ENG-376. Accessed 17 Oct 2009.

  • Amnesty International. 2008. Amnesty International Report 2008: The state of the world’s human rights. Frankfurt a. M.: S. Fischer Verlag.

  • Battjes, H. 2006. Legal effects of the Istanbul protocol. In CARE FULL. Medico-legal reports and the Istanbul Protocol in asylum procedures, eds. Bruin et al., 16–29. Amsterdam: Utrecht.

  • Bruin, R., M. Reneman, and E. Bloemen (eds.). 2006. CARE FULL. Medico legal reports and the Istanbul protocol in asylum procedures. Amsterdam: Utrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruin, R., Reneman, M. and Bloemen, E. 2006b. CARE FULL. Medico-legal reports and the Istanbul protocol in asylum procedures: Principles and recommendations. Amsterdam: Utrecht. www.pharos.nl/uploads/_site_1/Pdf/Documenten/Care%20Full%20PenR.pdf. Accessed 17 Oct 2009.

  • Frewer, A., H. Furtmayr, K. Krása, and T. Wenzel (eds.). 2009. Istanbul-Protokoll. Untersuchung und Dokumentation von Folter und Menschenrechtsverletzungen. Göttingen: V & R unipress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furtmayr, H., K. Krása, and A. Frewer (eds.). 2009. Folter und ärztliche Verantwortung. Das Istanbul-Protokoll und Problemfelder in der Praxis. Göttingen: V & R unipress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gareis, S., and J. Varwick. 2003. Die Vereinten Nationen. Stuttgart: UTB.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haagensen, J. 2007. The role of the Istanbul-protocol in the uphill battle for torture survivors being granted asylum in Europe and ensuring the perpetrators pay. Torture 17(3): 238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haenel, F., and M. Wenk-Ansohn (eds.). 2005. Begutachtung psychisch reaktiver Traumafolgen in aufenthaltsrechtlichen Verfahren. Weinheim: BeltzPVU.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iacopino, V., Ö. Özkalipçi, and C. Schlar. 1999. The Istanbul protocol: International standards for the effective investigation and documentation of torture and ill treatment. The Lancet 354: 1117.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Leyendecker, H. 2005. Die Lügen des Weißen Hauses, Psychosozial, 100, II:15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahler, C. 2002. Das Fakultativprotokoll der Konvention gegen Folter und andere grausame, unmenschliche oder erniedrigende Behandlung oder Strafe (CAT-OP), 183–186. MenschenRechtsMagazin, 3. Potsdam.

  • Mandel, L. and Worm, L. 2006. Implementing the Istanbul protocol, Praxis Paper No. 3, Copenhagen.

  • Mandel, L., and L. Worm. 2007a. Documentation of torture victims. Implementation of medico-legal protocols. Torture 17(1): 18–26.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mandel, L., and L. Worm. 2007b. Documentation of torture victims, assessment of the start procedure for medico-legal documentation. Torture 17(3): 196–202.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, M., and E. McArthur. 2006. The distinction between torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Torture 16(3): 147–151.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Physicians for Human Rights. 2001. Examining Asylum Seekers. A health professional’s guide to medical and psychological evaluations of torture. Boston. http://physiciansforhumanrights.org/library/documents/reports/examining-asylum-seekers-a.pdf. Accessed 17 Oct 2009.

  • Rauchfuss, K. 2006. Das Istanbul-Protokoll und die Folter. In Infobrief des Republikanischen Anwältinnen- und Anwältevereins, No. 97. http://www.rav.de/publikationen/infobriefe/archiv/infobrief-97-2006/beweise-fuer-das-unfassbare-das-istanbul-protocol/. Accessed 17 Oct 2009.

  • Ucpinar, H. and Baykal, T. 2006. An important step for prevention of torture. In Torture 16 (3), 252–267.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations 1948. Universal declaration of human rights. UN-Doc. A/810, 71–79.

  • United Nations 1966. International covenant on civil and political rights. UN Treaty Series Vol. 999, 171.

  • United Nations 1984. Convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (CAT). UN Treaty Series Vol. 1465, 85.

  • United Nations 1989. Manual on the effective prevention and investigation of extra-legal, arbitrary and summary executions. http://www.mnadvocates.org/4Jun20046.html.

  • United Nations 1999. Istanbul protocol—manual on the effective investigation and documentation of torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment or treatment. United Nations Professional Trainings Series, No. 8. http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/training8Rev1en.pdf. Accessed 13 Oct 2009.

  • United Nations 2002. Optional protocol to the convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. UN-Doc. A/RES/57/199, Annex.

  • Weiß, N. 1997. Auswertung der Rechtsprechung des Ausschusses gegen Folter (CAT). MenschenRechtsMagazin, 2. Potsdam, 15–22.

  • Weltärztebund: 2004, Handbuch der Deklarationen, Erklärungen und Entschließungen. www.bundesaerztekammer.de/downloads/handbuchwma.pdf.

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to express our gratitude to the Staedtler-Foundation in Nuremberg for its support in creating an edition of the Istanbul Protocol. We would also like to give special thanks to Dr. Kerstin Krása (Erlangen), Prof. Thomas Wenzel (Wien) and Thomas Oberschmidt (Berlin) for the splendid cooperation in carrying out the project. We thank the administration of the Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg and the Medical Faculty for their support of the “Forum for Medicine and Human Rights” connected to the Professorship for Medical Ethics at the Institute for the History of Medicine and Medical Ethics at the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Geschichte und Ethik der Medizin, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Glückstr. 10, 91054, Erlangen, Germany

    Holger Furtmayr & Andreas Frewer

Authors
  1. Holger Furtmayr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andreas Frewer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Holger Furtmayr.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Furtmayr, H., Frewer, A. Documentation of torture and the Istanbul Protocol: applied medical ethics. Med Health Care and Philos 13, 279–286 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-010-9248-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-010-9248-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation