France: prosecutor can initiate the exclusion of torture evidence Under the French Code of Criminal Procedure (Art. 173), a prosecutor (or the investigating judge) can initiate the procedure to exclude evidence if they suspect that evidence was obtained by torture. A challenge to the validity of a piece of evidence is referred to the Investigation Chamber of the Court of Appeal (Chambre de l’instruction). United Nations: Guidelines on the role of prosecutors The United Nations Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors (the Havana Guidelines, 1990) assist States in ensuring basic values and human rights protections underpin their prosecution services and that criminal proceedings are effective, impartial and fair. The Guidelines capture the legal obligation that when prosecutors come into possession of evidence against suspects that they know or believe on reasonable grounds was obtained through recourse to unlawful methods, such as torture or ill-treatment, they shall refuse to use such evidence and shall take all necessary steps to ensure that those responsible for using such methods are brought to justice. United States of America: confessions only admissible if combined with corroborating evidence The position in the United States is varied and complex, but all jurisdictions require some form of evidence in addition to the confession itself. The federal courts, and some US states, apply the corroboration rule which requires the prosecution to bolster a confession with some other evidence to establish the trustworthiness of the confession. The US Supreme Court has described this rule as “requir[ing] the Government to introduce substantial evidence which would tend to establish the trustworthiness of the statement” (Opper v United States (1954) 348 U.S. 84, 93). THE ROLE OF MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS  Medical practitioners have professional and ethical responsibilities to document and prevent torture and ill-treatment, and are also involved in the rehabilitation of victims of torture and ill-treatment. Following the detailed guidance in the Manual on Effective Investigation and Documentation of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Istanbul Protocol) helps ensure that forensic medical examinations produce the key evidence required to substantiate allegations of torture and ill-treatment, such as for the purposes of prosecution or seeking redress/reparations. A challenge sometimes arises because such medical practitioners are often employed by the State (sometimes as medical officers employed by the police, prisons or military), but, even where this is the case, their primary duty is to the ‘patient’ and they have the same ethical obligations as other health professionals, namely the duty to provide compassionate care and confidentiality, and obtain informed consent from their patients. These duties are set out in Chapter II, section C of the Istanbul Protocol: [Health professionals] “[-]cannot be obliged by contractual or other considerations to compromise their professional independence. They must make an unbiased assessment of the patient’s health interests and act accordingly.” TOOL: Non-admission of evidence obtained by torture and ill-treatment 6/15