A/75/179 resorted to by passive bystanders failing to prevent, report or repress such abuse, whether as government officials (internal bystanders) or as journalists or members of the general public (external bystanders). In both cases, diffusion of responsibility aims to distribute responsibility for wrongful acts or omissions away from the individual and onto the wider group. (a) Perpetrators, instigators and other active participants 38. In the case of active participants in torture and ill-treatment, diffusion of responsibility aims to make their individual involvement appear acceptable or excusable based on conformity with the behaviour of the collective. It is essentially a process of the normalization of conduct that would otherwise be perceived as wrongful and reprehensible. In the extreme, it may involve “authorizing” environments, in which political, religious, military or business leaders overtly or implicitly instigate, encourage or condone torture and ill-treatment as socially expected and accepted behaviour, for example by publicly stating that “torture works”. Similar “authorizing” effects can also be achieved t hrough peer pressure, in particular when the likelihood of disciplinary or judicial sanctions is negligible. 20 39. Subtler than authorization is the “routinization” of torture and ill -treatment through fragmentation. By breaking the process of torture and ill-treatment down into many detached, specialized and seemingly harmless subfunctions to be carried out at various levels of the hierarchy, each participant tends to focus on the technicalities of their contribution rather than the abusive nature of the o verall process. Routinization enables a broad diffusion of responsibility across various services, institutions, hierarchical levels and functions. 21 40. The process of normalization also often takes place through continued exposure to increasingly abusive acts, entailing a gradual desensitization of perpetrators, bystanders, the media and the public. The process has been well documented for torture training practices among military police, but also on a societal scale, culminating in genocide. 22 (b) Internal and external bystanders 41. In order for torture and ill-treatment to be eradicated, witnessing bystanders, whether from within the authorities or from the media or the general public, must hold instigators and perpetrators to account through independent and impartial judicial and disciplinary mechanisms. In practice, however, both internal and external bystanders are highly susceptible to passivity (“bystander apathy”). The greater the number of witnesses, the less likely each of them is to take action. Physical crowds can be so paralysing to bystanders that brain imaging studies have revealed reduced __________________ 20 21 22 20-09728 Shannon Houck and others, “When beliefs lead to (im)moral action: how believ ing in torture’s effectiveness shapes the endorsement of its use”, Political Psychology, vol. 40, No. 6 (2019), pp. 1,315–1,339; Herbert Kelman, “The policy context of torture: a social-psychological analysis”, International Review of the Red Cross, vol. 87, No. 857 (March 2005), pp. 123–134; Sophie Richardot, “‘You know what to do with them’: the formulation of orders and engagement in war crimes”, Aggression and Violent Behavior, vol. 19, No. 2 (March–April 2014), pp. 83–90; Mary Lowth, “Does torture work? Donald Trump and the CIA”, British Journal of General Practice, vol. 67, No. 656 (March 2017). Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement: How People Do Harm and Live with Themselves (Worth Publishers, 2016); Herbert Kelman, “Violence without moral restraint : reflections on the dehumanization of victims and victimizers”, Journal of Social Issues, vol. 29, No. 4 (1973), pp. 25–61. Janice Gibson, “Training people to inflict pain: State terror and social learning”, Journal of Humanistic Psychology, vol. 31, No. 2 (1991), pp. 72–87; Ervin Staub, “Building a peaceful society: origins, prevention, and reconciliation after genocide and ot her group violence”, American Psychologist, vol. 68, No. 7 (October 2013), pp. 576–589. 13/25