CAT/C/42/2 page 33 7. The result of the medical/psychological examination can be graduated from, e.g.: exposure to torture beyond any reasonable doubt; high level of agreement; or partial agreement between the various categories of information - with or without objective signs of pathologies (physical and or mental); to disagreement. 8. However, a number of reservations should be taken into consideration, e.g., impaired memory of the victim and psychical inhibitions, ailments that are prevalent in many victims of torture. 9. The SPT notes that with the methods of torture normally used in times of peace, physical marks are most often unspecific or even absent. The presence, the nature and degree of severity of physical and psychological symptoms/illness after torture vary, depending not only on the nature of the torture, but also, e.g. on the physical and psychological constitution and background of the victim and the existence of co-morbidity. 10. Thus, the SPT is of the opinion that often existence of torture can neither be proved nor disproved through a medical/psychological examination carried out according to the Istanbul Protocol. Contextualization of the Istanbul Protocol 11. In the fight against impunity the Istanbul Protocol is a useful tool in the appraisal of allegations of torture. The result of the medical/psychological examination is a piece of evidence together with other evidence. 12. The examination can never identify the torturers. This would rely on other evidence. 13. In a court case the judge may decide that the whole of the evidence is not sufficient to convict implicated officers. 14. The SPT notes that acquittal of an implicated officer does not necessarily mean that the statements of torture were false, but only that the whole of the evidence was not strong enough to lead to conviction. The decision of the judge is based on the sum of evidence on two levels: • Whether torture had happened • Whether the evidence was strong enough to convict particular persons 15. The SPT finds it necessary that judges, lawyers and public prosecutors who deal with cases of possible torture have basic knowledge of the principles of the Istanbul Protocol so that they can assess compliance of the examination with the principles of the Protocol and understand the conclusion of the medical/psychological examination and the basis for it. 16. However, the final conclusion of the examination should only be contested by medical/psychological experts with reference to objective deficiencies and errors. 17. Unless the medical/psychological experts conclude that there were gross disagreements between the various pieces of information, which could not be ascribed to e.g. the mental state of