CAT/OP/PER/1 114. The Subcommittee received information about the tendency of judges and prosecutors to categorize acts of torture not as a specific offence but as bodily harm or abuse of authority, crimes that are different in nature and carry a lesser penalty. In addition, in considering the evidence and determining the charges, judges often rely on the description of the injuries given in the medical certificate, and do not evaluate the context in which the injuries may have occurred or else apply an extremely narrow interpretation of the offence defined under article 321 of the Criminal Code. For example, the Subcommittee learned of one case in which the office of the prosecutor in Cajamarca determined that National Prison Institute officials could not be regarded as “public authorities”, and another in which the prosecutor’s office brought charges of “minor bodily harm” because the medical certificate prescribed only two weeks off work and the existence of severe and cruel suffering had not been established. The Subcommittee is of the view that, in determining whether the crime of torture has occurred, it is not enough to equate the intensity of the suffering inflicted with the degree of physical disability resulting from the suffering, as if the crime in question were that of bodily injury. 115. Other factors contributing to impunity, according to testimony received, have to do with the difficulty of identifying those responsible for torture or ill-treatment. For example, a practice cited in recent cases of arrests during demonstrations is that of officers covering their faces and not displaying their regulation service numbers. The Subcommittee heard claims of threats and intimidation in connection with some cases of torture in which complaints were filed, or even attacks on victims, their families and their lawyers because they had filed complaints. 116. This context suggests the existence of a large number of unreported cases. Many people who have suffered ill-treatment and torture do not even report them for fear of reprisals and the high personal, family and financial costs that seeing a complaint through would entail. The judicial system’s lack of credibility, because of the practically nonexistent responses to the few cases that are actually reported, contributes to underreporting. On the basis of testimony by victims, civil society organizations and some lawyers, the Subcommittee has the impression that the restricted or passive role of prosecutors, public defenders and judges in trying cases of torture or ill-treatment reinforces the cycle of impunity. 117. As the Committee against Torture and the Human Rights Committee have already done, the Subcommittee reiterates the State party’s obligation to ensure that all allegations of torture or ill-treatment are promptly, thoroughly and independently investigated, that perpetrators of such acts are brought to justice and that victims receive adequate reparation, including health and rehabilitation services. Furthermore, the State party should ensure that judges, prosecutors, health workers and others working in spheres related to the documentation and investigation of torture and ill-treatment receive adequate training on the Istanbul Protocol and international standards relating to torture and ill-treatment, with particular attention to the appropriate classification of cases of torture and to the performance of specialized medical examinations.15 118. Over and above any criminal complaints that may be made, the Subcommittee recommends that the State party improve the police inspectorate system so that it can independently investigate responsibility in cases of torture and ill-treatment and impose appropriate disciplinary sanctions. 119. The Subcommittee recommends that the State party issue a strong condemnation, at the highest level of authority, declaring that torture will not be tolerated under any circumstances. Reminders of this message of zero tolerance of torture and ill-treatment should be issued periodically to all security officers and prison officers, for example as part of their training. 120. The Subcommittee is of the view that, given the gaps in effective legal protection of persons deprived of their liberty in prisons, it would be advisable to 15 GE.17-13638 CCPR/C/PER/CO/5, concluding observations of the Human Rights Committee on the fifth periodic report of Peru, 29 April 2013, para. 19. 17