CAT/C/42/2 page 36 Final remarks 33. The SPT underlines that the number of complaints of torture is not a reliable indicator of the real prevalence of the problem. Complicated complaint procedures and risk of reprisals may diminish the number drastically. 34. The SPT notes that one of the objectives of torture is to break down the victim, e.g. to make him confess to a crime or to give information. It follows that most victims of torture do not have the necessary mental strength to enter into bureaucratic technicalities and lengthy procedures with interviews lasting several days. It also follows that the doctor working in police facilities apart from being proactive should always - on an informed basis - respect a possible victim of torture’s wish not to be referred to expert examination and an eventual wish to have information for the database sent in a manner that cannot identify the detainee directly. 35. In police custody a complainant should be safeguarded against direct reprisals from implicated officers through the maintenance of medical confidentiality. 36. In the system of justice the complainant should be safeguarded against reprisals, e.g. charges with defamation of authorities in case the medical/psychological examination fails to positively demonstrate exposure to torture beyond “any reasonable doubt” (see classification above). -----