CAT/C/39/2 page 59 inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”52 (emphases added). The European Court deemed important to distinguish other inhuman treatment from torture because the latter involves a “special stigma” of violation.53 It is also necessary, for its characterization, that the cruel or inhuman treatment be deliberate and have a specific purpose. Several cases considered by the European HR system deepen this understanding, as the case Ireland v. the United Kingdom, the so-called “Greek Case” and also the cases Selmouni v. France and Ihlan v. Turkey, in which the European Court mentioned the United Nations Convention against Torture.54 249. In the light of the distinctions between torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, chiefly the elements of special degree of severity and specific purpose, which attach a special stigma to acts of torture, it would seem mistaken to try to equate torture with problematic conditions of detention. The Brazilian Government took note of the observations on the serious conditions of deprivation of freedom in the detention centers visited by the Committee, a serious and complex problem that Brazil has been endeavoring to solve. Brazil highly appreciates the recommendations of the Committee related to this question. 250. The problems of overcrowding and inadequate conditions of deprivation of freedom in detention centers are serious human rights issues which require adequate solution, including through cooperation with the relevant international mechanisms. Such problems usually derive from a complex ensemble of factors, which may include excessive use of deprivation of liberty as punishment, growing rates of criminality sometimes linked to economic and social problems and lack of sufficient public resources - especially in developing countries - to build and restore places of detention and hire and train personnel. The process of improvement of the conditions of deprivation of freedom in Brazil - a developing country - cannot show immediate results, but several improvements have come about, such as the progressive abolition of jails in police precincts, the construction of new and better detention centers, the plan underway to establish units of the Unified Health System inside detention centers, etc., besides several preventive actions that seek to avoid deprivation of freedom and encourage alternative sentencing, as detailed later in this document. 251. It would seem thus inadequate to consider the existence of a deliberate system with punitive and discriminatory purposes, of deprivation of freedom in situations, for instance, of overcrowding and unhealthy conditions. Such situations persist in certain cases, despite the best efforts of Brazilian authorities, and not with their consent or acquiescence. These situations lack 52 Resolution 3452(XXX), adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 9 December 1975, article 1.2. 53 54 ECHR, Ireland v. the United Kingdom, Judgement of 18 January 1978, idem. Cf. LONG, Debra. Guide to Jurisprudence on Torture and Ill-Treatment - Article 3 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights, Geneva: APT, 2002, pp. 13-20. BUENO, Gonzalo. El Concepto de Tortura y Otros Tratos Crueles, Inhumanos o Degradantes en el Derecho Internacional de los Derechos Humanos, available at: http://www.derechopenal.com.ar/archivos.php?op=13&id=169.