A/HRC/25/60 (f) Clarify the procedural rules on admissibility, including the burden of proof applied by courts; by ensuring that: (i) the burden of proof shall be shifted to the State; when (ii) the appellant advances a plausible reason why evidence may have been procured by torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; and that (iii) the court shall inquire as to whether there is a real risk that the evidence has been obtained by torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and if there is, the evidence must not be admitted; (g) Ensure that in order to show that evidence has not been obtained by torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, a court must rely on evidence other that the testimony of the investigating officer and further enhance the admissibility of independent and impartial medical evidence; (h) Ensure that closed material procedures comply with the exclusionary rule and enable the individual effectively to challenge admissibility of evidence, including evidence from the security services; (i) Elaborate a rule that protects legitimate state secrets adequately and at the same time does not prevent a thorough examination of whether torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment has taken place. 83. Regarding the use of torture-tainted information by executive actors, all States shall: (a) Submit all actions by the executive branch of government, including collecting, sharing and receiving information to independent and impartial review under the States’ obligations under the absolute prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, including the obligation to prevent and discourage torture and other ill-treatment; (b) Ensure that if States request foreign intelligence services to undertake activities on their behalf, all legal standards regarding the absolute prohibition of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment shall apply; (c) Reiterate that no exceptional circumstances may be invoked as a justification for torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; (d) Restrain from creating a market for the fruits of illegal and abhorrent interrogation practices by collecting, sharing or receiving information obtained by torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; (e) Interpret the standards outlined by the exclusionary rule in a goaloriented approach and apply by way of analogy to the collecting, sharing and receiving of information obtained by torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment even if not used in “proceedings” narrowly defined; 20