Handbook links...	website home page
	Table of Contents - Search - Part I: Preliminary Matters - Part II: Documenting Allegations - Part III: Responding to the Information Collected - Appendices
	II. Documenting Allegations: section links...
	1. Introduction - 2. Basic Principles of Documentation - 3. Interviewing the Person Alleging Torture - 4. Information Which Should be Recorded - 5. Evidence - Summary of Part II

	On this page...
	4.1 Model information - 4.2 Specific contexts

PART II - DOCUMENTING ALLEGATIONS

4. Information which should be recorded

IMPORTANT NOTE :

The guidelines below indicate the optimum information which you could collect. However, this is not a rigid checklist, and must be used flexibly, adapting to the particular context. It is important not to become excessively focused on obtaining a specific number of details, which may either be inappropriate in a particular case or may result in your failing to pick up on other important points which you were not expecting. Even more importantly, you must respect the individual and not see them as simply an information source, or the interview may itself deteriorate into a form of interrogation.

Be guided by your impression of the clarity of the account. Ask yourself throughout if there is any aspect which you do not understand, or which seems unclear, vague or contradictory. Check that it makes sense to you. Watch out for gaps in the chronology, where periods of time are not accounted for. Returning to these gaps and apparent contradictions may reveal elements which you did not think to ask about. Ideally, your notes should enable you to recount the events in sequence, with no big questions left unanswered.

Do not delay in sending your allegation due to the absence of some of the details included below (they may not be relevant or essential), but do make sure that you can at least establish the minimum elements for making an allegation of ill-treatment (see Part I, Chapter 3.3): that a victim underwent, or is at risk of undergoing, ill-treatment at the hands of or with the knowledge and acceptance of a state authority.

top of page

4.1 Model information

4.1.1 What kind of details do you need in order to answer these basic questions?

The information should:

1. Identify the victim(s)
2. Identify the perpetrator(s)
3. Describe how the victim came into the hands of the public officials
4. Explain where the victim was taken / held
5. Describe what the holding conditions were like
6. Describe the form of the ill-treatment
7. Describe any official response to the incident (including stating that there was none)

Identify the victim(s)

The more detail can be obtained about the individual, the more definite the identification can be:

• Full name (and father's name - relevant to some cultures).
• Gender (this may not be clear from the name alone)
• Date of birth/age
• Occupation
• Address
• Appearance, including any unusual characteristics
• A photograph - of the victim alive or indeed dead (these might help experts to interpret any obvious signs of ill-treatment seen in the photographs)
• Some indication of the victim's state of health before being arrested or detained - medical records, witness accounts etc.

Remember that urgent actions cannot normally be taken without a name.

Identify the perpetrator(s)

Remember that it must be established that the victim was in the custody of, or held with the acquiescence of, the authorities, or that the authorities failed to protect the victim, for a violation to be established. You do not necessarily have to identify the individual perpetrators (though you should if you can), as long as you can establish that they had a connection with the state.

• Who apprehended the victim? - ideally the number of people and their name, rank and unit. If not known then the following details can help in identification:
• Which security force, military, or paramilitary unit did they belong to?
• How were they dressed? - uniform or plain clothes?
• What did they look like? - did they have any unusual characteristics?
• What weapons did they carry? - some weapons may be fairly specific to a force.
• What vehicles were used? - marked or unmarked; was the number plate or registration noted?

Describe how the victim came into the hands of the public officials

The method of abduction or taking into custody, and subsequent treatment, may itself be characteristic of a particular group operating in your area (which might have been established by previous submissions to the international bodies), and helps to establish that the victim was held by the perpetrators.

• Where was the person taken into custody? - home, street, place of worship, outside a military base etc.
• When was the person taken into custody? - the approximate date, or the month or season of the year. The time of day or whether it was morning, afternoon or night.
• How did it occur? Was any form of restraint used? Were any others present who would have seen it happen? - if no detail is known, when and where was the last time the victim was seen and in whose company? Was there any warning, was the victim summoned to a police station; were they in a demonstration on the street etc.
• Was any reason given for the arrest? Even if no official reason was given, a reason may be suggested by the kind of questions asked or the circumstances of the arrest.

Explain where the victim was taken / held

The victims may have been held in a particular place, or may have simply been taken to an area of the town and then left, with ill-treatment occurring during transport.

• What was the name and location of the police/gendarme station, military camp, institution or area?
• How long were they held for?
• Were they transferred anywhere? If so, where to, by whom and on what approximate dates? How did they get there? Was any reason given for the transfer? If it was temporary, how long did it last?

Describe what the holding conditions were like

The conditions of detention may form a part of the ill-treatment, but this can be decided by the body to which you submit your allegations. For secret places of detention, the combined testimonies of different individuals may establish that the place actually exists, and may help to identify it. It may even enable you to construct a map of the layout of the establishment. You should therefore record as much detail as possible.

Ask the victim to describe in as much detail as possible the place in which they were held, particularly the cell or place where they slept and any other rooms where they were taken, including for any interrogation. Victims may have been blindfolded - if this is the case, you should ask them for descriptions using senses other than sight - what did they hear, smell or touch? Below is the sort of information you need to document about conditions:

• Location of the room within the institution: did they have do go upstairs or down; what could they hear and smell around them; did they notice any landmarks on their way there; if there is one, can anything be seen out of the window of the room?
• The room itself: What size was it? What were the walls, floor, ceiling, door made of ? What shape was it? Was there anything unusual about it?
• Others held in the room: Were any other people held there; if so, how many; are any of them possible witnesses; would they have noticed anything about the state of health of the victim; what state of health were the other people in?
• Isolation: If the victim was in isolation, for how long and in what manner were they isolated?
• Content of the room: What was in the room - bedding, furniture, toilet, sink etc.?
• Climate of the room: What was the temperature like; was there any ventilation; was there any dampness?
• Light: Was there any light; was it natural light from a window, or electric light; if it was electric light, how much of the time was it on; What did the light look or feel like, e.g. colour, intensity?
• Hygiene: Were there any facilities for personal hygiene; where and how did they go to the toilet or bathe? What was the general hygiene of the place like? Was it infested in any way?
• Clothes: What clothes did they wear and could they be washed or changed?
• Food and drinking water: how often and how much food and water was given; what was the quality like; who provided it; was it provided free of charge?
• Exercise: Was there any opportunity to leave the cell? If so, for how long and how often?
• Regime: Were there any especially stringent or monotonous aspects to the regime?
• Medical facilities: Was a doctor or any other form of healthcare professional present or available; could any of the prisoners be examined or treated in a separate medical facility such as by a family doctor or hospital; were medicines available; who were they provided by?
• Family visits: Was there access to family visits; if so, where did these take place; could conversations be overheard; did the family know where the person was?
• Legal representation: Was there access to a legal representative; when was access first given, i.e. how long after the victim was first taken into custody; how often was it given; where did visits take place; could the conversation be overheard?
• Appearance before a judicial officer: Did the victim appear before a magistrate or court; when did this happen, i.e. how long after the victim was first taken into custody?
• Bribes: Did any bribe have to be paid for any of these facilities?

Describe the form of the ill-treatment

Remember that ill-treatment might be both physical and psychological, and that either or both may amount to torture. The forms of ill-treatment are limited only by the imagination of the perpetrator, and it is neither possible nor desirable to provide a list. The date and place in which the ill-treatment occurred may help to identify the perpetrator, for example by making it possible to check who was on duty at that time.

The victim or witness should be asked about the exact nature of the treatment inflicted:

Where did it occur - what happened - how often - what effects did it have on the victim immediately and later?

You could ask:

• What they can recall about the identity of the perpetrator(s).
• If there were any distinctive things about the room in which ill-treatment occurred.
• If there were any other detainees present at the time, if they saw what happened to the victim and if anything happened to them.
• If the victim was asked any questions during the ill-treatment or if anything else was said to him or her - this may give an indication of the purpose, if any, of the ill-treatment.
• For a description of exactly what occurred and how frequently - where the ill-treatment was physical, you should ask for a description of any instruments used and the parts of the body to which the treatment was applied. Where the ill-treatment was psychological, ask the victim if he or she can describe exactly how he or she felt, both at the time and afterwards.
• What the immediate effects were on the individual of each particular form of ill-treatment.
• If they received any medical treatment, immediately or any time later, including on release.
• If there were any medical personnel present just before, during or after ill-treatment - if so, did they identify themselves and what was their role?
• If there are or were any long term effects (physical or mental) that the victim attributes to the ill-treatment.

What was the official response, if any, to the incident?

• Did the victim's family apply to the authorities for information about the victim at any stage, including during the early stages of being in custody? Was there any response?
• If the victim appeared before a magistrate or court at any time during the period of custody, was he or she informed of any charges; was a legal representative there; did the victim have any visible signs of injury at the time?
• Was the victim able to see a doctor either during or upon release from custody? What kind of doctor was it, e.g. an independent practitioner, a prison doctor, a state doctor? How did the victim get there? Did anyone accompany him or her? Once there, did the doctor carry out an examination? Was anyone present during the examination? Did the doctor issue a medical report? What did it say? Did the victim have any obvious signs of injury at the time?
• Did the victim complain to anyone about ill-treatment or tell anyone in authority? What was the response?
• Was any investigation carried out? What did it involve? Were any witnesses interviewed? Were the alleged perpetrators interviewed? If the victim died while in custody, was an autopsy carried out?
• Has the victim had any contact with the officials who took him or her into custody (or other officials from the same branch or force) since the incident?

4.1.2 What can you do to obtain these details without influencing the content of the account?

Describing what happened in such detail in a precise chronological manner does not come easily to most victims. They will need your guidance in knowing which aspects to elaborate upon - but remember that your role should be exactly that, to provide guidance, not to put words in the interviewee's mouth. Always begin with general or open questions (questions to which the answer is unlimited, e.g. 'did anything happen to you?', rather than 'were you tortured?'), and become more specific on the basis of the information which is offered to you.

top of page

Case-Study:

Here are two very different ways of telling the same story:

Account 1 is not inaccurate or wrong - it simply lacks detail. However, this detail is the key to many possible courses of action you might wish to pursue. If you look at Account 1, you can see that it presents the basic elements for a torture allegation (victim; perpetrator with connection to the authorities; ill-treatment) but the description of the ill-treatment is minimal and there is little indication of who the individual perpetrators might be or of how the allegation might be corroborated. This makes it difficult for any significant action to be taken in connection with the allegation.

Account 2, on the other hand, is extremely detailed and informative, and provides many opportunities for corroboration. In addition to presenting the basic elements for a torture allegation, it:

• Gives many details about the individual perpetrators which should make identification possible
• Describes the location and lay-out of the office where the ill-treatment took place in such a way as to make it possible to find it if a visit to the police station were carried out
• May make it possible to find the instruments used in the ill-treatment if a visit to the police station were carried out
• Makes the purpose of the arrest and interrogation clear
• Gives some detail of the conditions in which the victim was detained
• Describes the ill-treatment in a precise way such as to make it possible for a medical expert to express an opinion on its relationship with the victim's injuries
• Describes the victim's injuries, including a basic indication of his emotional state

The questions which Maria may have asked in order to obtain the more complete account could include the following:

Account 2 could also be improved in certain ways, although it is already more than adequate for most purposes. It does not identify possible witnesses - for example, we do not know if anyone saw José being taken from his home. The description of the conditions of detention is sketchy and could be elaborated upon. It does not indicate if José was allowed to contact his lawyer or family, if he was given a medical examination at any stage during his period in custody, or if he made a formal complaint about the ill-treatment to anyone in authority. It is also gives no information about what might have taken place between José's second interrogation and his release.

More importantly, if you look carefully, you may notice that Maria missed something. José was arrested at 5 a.m., but only arrived at the police station at 7 a.m. Not being a local, it did not occur to her to ask how far away the police station is from José's home. In fact, it is three streets away. So what happened to José between 5 a.m. and 7 a.m.? Maria also missed another clue - the bruising and swelling in José's lower back and kidney area and his complaints of pain when urinating. Even for a layman, these symptoms would be difficult to reconcile with José's account of being hit on the head and receiving electric shocks to the nipple, which he insisted was the only ill-treatment he was subjected to at the police station. It seems likely that prior to being brought to the police station, José was brought to a location where he was severely beaten or perhaps kicked, particularly in the kidney area. Noticing the inconsistency in timing would have revealed a further incident of ill-treatment which José may have forgotten to mention or thought insignificant compared to what happened to him at the police station. Maria may have been too specific in her questioning in the early stages of the interview, asking him what happened at the police station, rather than what happened to him after being taken from his home, or simply asking what happened next.

top of page

4.2 Specific contexts

The examples and questions given in the preceding section on model information are very much oriented towards incidents of ill-treatment in the context of police or other short-term official custody because this is the most common type of allegation received. While most of the general guidelines and elements will apply in other contexts, you need to be aware that not all will be relevant or appropriate. When preparing for a visit to another type of institution or for an interview relating to a context other than previously described, you should spend some time thinking about the differences in the lines of questioning you might need to explore.

Examples of institutions of long term detention would include prisons (holding both remand and convicted prisoners), other places where prisoners awaiting trial are kept, sometimes for a very long time, and juvenile detention centres. In such institutions, if you are focusing on treatment inside the institution (rather than events which occurred prior to imprisonment) you are unlikely to be concerned with questions of arrest or abduction. Instead, you will need to ask more searching questions about the conditions of imprisonment, the prison regime, relations with the warders and individual incidents of ill-treatment. In relation to the latter, you could ask the same type of questions as Maria did when enquiring about what happened to José when he was taken from his cell. You should also be open to the possibility of group ill-treatment, or excessive use of force or brutality in response to disciplinary problems such as riots.

It should not be forgotten, also, that institutions like prisons are a major source of allegations relating to events which occurred prior to imprisonment, particularly police ill-treatment. This is especially the case among newly-arrived prisoners, because it may be the first time that they feel secure enough to speak about their experiences. See Part I, Chapters 3.4 and 3.5, for further discussion on this point.

In non-punitive custodial settings, such as children or old people's homes, or psychiatric institutions, again your focus may need to be on the general environment and conditions, relations with the supervisory staff, and any individual incidents of ill-treatment. In such contexts, ill-treatment may often take the shape of physical or sexual abuse, but may also involve various forms of psychological abuse. Remember that it is best for children to be interviewed by someone with at least some experience of working with children. A practice common to many psychiatric institutions which gives rise to controversy is the use of restraints on residents.

In military institutions, problems may arise from the disciplinary regime, which is often very tough. In such cases, it is probable that you will be investigating allegations of punishment possibly amounting to ill-treatment, such as solitary confinement or withdrawal of certain privileges. Remember to enquire not only about the punishment itself, how it is carried out, how long it lasts, its frequency, etc., but also about the process by which punishments or disciplinary measures are awarded. Another possible cause for concern may be official tolerance of bullying within the armed forces, which could in certain cases amount to ill-treatment. It would be particularly important to record details concerning the exact form of the bullying, its frequency and intensity, the number of persons involved, the extent to which it is widespread, any physical or psychological effects the victim may be suffering, and any indication of official tolerance of the practice.

In places of detention for foreigners, the issue may be ill-treatment of the foreigners by the local police or other authorities (which should generally be approached in a similar way to other forms of short-term custody), but it is most likely to concern the process for deportation of persons to countries where they are believed to be at risk of torture. In such cases, you will need to go through each stage of the deportation process in detail, and obtain copies of the relevant decisions. You will also need to interview the person about their reasons for fearing that they will be subjected to torture in order to establish a strong basis for not deporting them. You will need to ask about any previous incidents of torture undergone by the interviewee or close relatives, any threats received by them, and any other reasons to fear that there is a risk to the person. Remember that you should focus on current not prior risk.

In the case of abductions, disappearances and extra-judicial executions, you will not generally be interviewing the victim himself, but more likely a relative or close acquaintance. You will need to concentrate on the circumstances surrounding the disappearance of the person, the modus operandi of the abductors, and particularly on the task of identifying witnesses who may be able to provide information not only about the circumstances of the arrest, but also about the condition of the victim at the time of being taken into custody. Where the victim's body has been found, this will be very important to help establish that any marks of injury on the body must have occurred during custody.

When collecting allegations in camps for refugees and internally displaced persons, be aware that you may receive allegations both about abuses which occurred prior to arriving in the camp, and about abuses which have occurred inside the camp. It is very important to keep very accurate records of the perpetrators of alleged incidents and to be very thorough in seeking to identify them. This applies equally to allegations made in connection with conflict zones generally.

	On this page...	top of page
	4.1 Model information - 4.2 Specific contexts

	II. Documenting Allegations: section links...
	1. Introduction - 2. Basic Principles of Documentation - 3. Interviewing the Person Alleging Torture - 4. Information Which Should be Recorded - 5. Evidence - Summary of Part II
	Handbook links...	website home page
	Table of Contents - Search - Part I: Preliminary Matters - Part II: Documenting Allegations - Part III: Responding to the Information Collected - Appendices