The OSCE has field operations in only a limited number of countries and regions within the OSCE area (see box below), thus limiting the scope of the study. This also meant that the focus was on torture prevention in countries at various stages of postcommunist and/or post-conflict transition. Since information was collected from OSCE field operations in order to analyse OSCE experience, some of responses received were inevitably anecdotal and the views expressed cannot be taken to reflect those of the organization. However, some trends emerged from the responses that provide a sufficient basis for preliminary conclusions to be drawn. Although an OSCE-wide survey is beyond the scope of this report, two sections have been included that cover developments in the wider OSCE area, dealing with counterterrorism strategies and torture, and the implementation of OPCAT in the OSCE area, respectively. 1.2 Terminology The terms “torture” or “torture and ill-treatment” as used in this report can be taken to include torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment as defined by the relevant international instruments and jurisprudence. For ease of reference and to avoid discrepancies in translation, offices that are effectively carrying out the role of Ombudsman institutions will be referred to as “Ombudsman offices” throughout. 1.3 Summary of the existing framework for protection against torture It should be emphasized that OSCE commitments are unequivocal with regard to the prohibition against torture and are applicable to all OSCE participating States, regardless of whether they are parties to the relevant legally binding international instruments mentioned below. Relevant OSCE commitments include the Vienna Document of 1989, 2 in which participating States undertook to prohibit and take effective measures to prevent and punish torture. The absolute nature of the prohibition against torture is reflected in the Copenhagen Document of 1990, 3 where it is stated that: “... no exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture …” In the Istanbul Charter of 1999, 4 participating States further committed themselves to the eradication of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The above-mentioned commitments reflect international human rights law, and provisions relating to the prohibition against torture and related issues appear in several international instruments. The most notable of these are the UN Convention 2 “Vienna Document 1999 of the Negotiations on Confidence- and Security-Building Measures”, OSCE website, < http://www.osce.org/documents/fsc/1999/11/4265_en.pdf>. 3 “Document of the Copenhagen Meeting of the Conference on the Human Dimension of the CSCE”, OSCE website, < http://www.osce.org/documents/odihr/1990/06/13992_en.pdf>. 4 “Istanbul Document 1999”, OSCE website, <www.osce.org/documents/mcs/1999/11/4050_en.pdf>. 9