A/75/179 theories” and, instead, question the motivations and integrity of “moral advocates” making, transmitting or investigating the incriminating allegations. 16 30. In practice, wilful ignorance enables officials and judges, but also journalists and ordinary citizens, to deny the occurrence of torture or ill-treatment at the hands of the Government, institution or group they identify or associate with, even when faced with compelling evidence. 17 In his official dialogue with States relating to specific concerns or allegations of torture or ill-treatment, the following predominant reaction patterns encountered by the Special Rapporteur are indicative of that pattern: (a) Failing to acknowledge or respond to officially communicated allegations; (b) Evading a substantive dialogue on specific inquiries based on purported formal, procedural or institutional obstacles; (c) Rejecting allegations or concerns without any substantive dialogue; (d) Diverting attention by accusing the mandate holder of “political motivations”, “lack of impartiality”, “interference with internal affairs” or “violation of national sovereignty”; (e) Diverting attention through sweeping assurances of the Government’s commitment to human rights, sweeping accusations against other stakeholders or misguided expressions of protest, indignation and victim mentality; (f) Discrediting, demonizing or blaming victims, witnesses, critics and other moral advocates. 31. Within governmental and judicial authorities, as well as institutional oversight mechanisms, bystander complacency caused by wilful ignorance represents a significant obstacle to the effective investigation, prosecution and punishment of torture and ill-treatment, as well as to redress and rehabilitation. Distorted perceptions of reality resulting from wilful ignorance also routinely render media organizations incapable of objectively detecting and exposing government involvement in torture and ill-treatment, and prevent ordinary citizens from addressing and correcting systemic shortcomings through their democratic rights. 32. The systemic intermingling of public and private interests, such as through campaign funding, parliamentary lobbying and the large-scale privatization of essential public functions, including military, security, intelligence and correctiona l services, creates overarching systemic identities, in which moral dilemmas resulting from exploitative practices can no longer be resolved in line with the principles of democracy and the rule of law, but are suppressed through wilful ignorance. This is __________________ 16 17 20-09728 Nadia Bashir, “Wielding a double-edged sword: public moral advocates are derogated yet influential”, PhD dissertation, University of Toronto, 2014; Aloysia Brooks, “The annihilation of memory and silent suffering: inhibiting outrage at the injustice of tor ture in the war on terror in Australia, PhD dissertation, University of Wollongong, 2016; Jared Del Rosso, “Textual mediation of denial: congress, Abu Ghraib, and the construction of an isolated incident”, Social Problems, vol. 58, No. 2 (July 2011), pp. 165–188; Richard Jackson “Language, policy and the construction of a torture culture in the war on terrorism”, Review of International Studies, vol. 33, No. 3 (July 2007), pp. 353–371; Jean Lennane, “What happens to whistleblowers, and why?” Social Medicine, vol. 6, No. 4 (2012), pp. 249–258. Lance Bennett, Regina Lawrence and Steven Livingston, “None dare call it torture: indexing and limits of press independence in the Abu Ghraib scandal”, Journal of Communication, vol. 56, No. 3 (September 2006), pp. 467–485; Ruth Blakeley and Sam Raphael, “Accountability, denial and the future-proofing of British torture”, International Affairs, vol. 96, No. 3 (May 2020), pp. 691–709; Cătălin Mamali, “Accuracy of basic knowledge of traumatic historical events: The Armenian genocide”, Journal of Loss and Trauma, vol. 22, No. 2 (June 2016), pp. 99–109; Irene Bruna Seu, “‘Doing denial’: audience reaction to human rights appeals”, Discourse and Society, vol. 21, No. 4 (July 2010), pp. 438–457. 11/25