CAT/OP/BRA/1 Rapporteur on Torture following his visit in 2001, many of the recommendations would merely require the authorities to abide by existing Brazilian law. 12 B. Institutional framework 23. The prevention of torture in places of deprivation of liberty is the shared responsibility of several institutions working in the field of administration of justice. The SPT is concerned that the current institutional framework in Brazil does not provide for sufficient protection against torture and ill-treatment. 1. Public defence system 24. Free legal aid for those that cannot afford a private lawyer is guaranteed in the Constitution of Brazil. However, through interviews with persons deprived of their liberty, the SPT found that free legal assistance was not available to all those who needed it. 25. During its visit, the SPT held meetings with public defenders, at federal and state levels, in order to learn about the challenges they faced. In general, the SPT was informed that lack of institutional autonomy and lack of financial and human resources, in particular when compared to the office of the prosecutor, curtailed the public defenders’ work. 13 In addition, the SPT noted that in the state of Goiás, there was no public defence system. 26. The SPT recommends that public defenders offices be granted autonomy and that they be provided with enough financial and material resources so as to enable them to offer adequate legal defence to all persons deprived of their liberty. The SPT further recommends that the State party expedites the creation and effective implementation of a public defence system in those states that do not yet have one. 27. The SPT recommends that public defenders’ offices keep a central register of allegations of torture and ill-treatment, including information provided in confidence to them. The SPT also recommends that public defenders cooperate and coordinate with the national and/or local preventive mechanisms, in particular to avoid reprisals following monitoring visits. 2. Judiciary 28. According to information gathered, judges rarely asked questions about detainees’ treatment during investigation. Judges should be vigilant for signs of torture and illtreatment, and take steps to terminate and remedy such situations. 29. The SPT recommends that judges be obliged by law to ask every detainee about his/her treatment during investigation, to record in writing any allegations of torture or ill-treatment, and to order an immediate forensic medical examination whenever there are grounds to believe that a detainee could have been subjected to torture or illtreatment. 30. Under Brazilian law, confessions are allowed as evidence in court unless they were obtained in violation of constitutional or other legal provisions.14 Despite the legal 12 13 14 6 Report of the Special Rapporteur, E/CN.4/2011/66/Add.2, para. 168. According to information provided by the federal government in reply to the SPT’s preliminary observations, over the past four years the Government of Brazil provided approximately US$8 million for public defenders in 18 states to provide legal assistance to prisoners. Brazilian Constitution, article 32 ; Brazilian Code of Criminal Procedure, article 157.