Next steps Since rehabilitation is at the core of the IRCT’s work, the members that were able to participate in this global conference offered the essential expertise needed to contribute to the discussion on how rehabilitation services should be provided within the framework laid out by the UN Committee against Torture in General Comment No. 3. The torture rehabilitation movement is in a unique position to hold states accountable to their obligations and ensure the delivery of proper support, according to the needs of torture survivors. The parallel workshops in which very different countries were juxtaposed within four thematic areas highlight the complexity of the rehabilitation movement and the context within which IRCT’s membership works. As demonstrated in the workshops and in the follow up discussion, there are many different models of rehabilitation services existing across our global network, depending on a multitude of factors including the political and legal system, security situation, and the economic, cultural and social framework. Measuring the effectiveness that rehabilitation services have with regard to supporting torture survivors and holding states accountable to support rehabilitation services either directly or indirectly is very much a developing aspect of our work. The conclusions drawn from this conference should be taken into consideration by the torture rehabilitation movement when it further develops its work to promote the right to rehabilitation. The main issues can be summarised as follows: Context (e.g. political, historical, cultural) within which rehabilitation services are provided is vital to understanding the needs of survivors, the capacity to deliver and the most appropriate service model. There is no ‘one size fits all’ rehabilitation model — variations will exist. However, in any model a victim-centred approach is essential. According to the environment within which rehabilitation services are delivered, different approaches may be taken, for example: • Transitional justice societies – • Other elements of redress tend to be given a greater focus than the individual’s clinical rehabilitation; • Civil society organisations play a vital role in raising awareness and advocating for the inclusion of individual rehabilitation measures as an integral part of the transitional justice process; • Rehabilitation may take on an individual or collective nature depending on the historical context. • Refugee-receiving countries – • Asylum-seekers are at risk of being returned to the place where torture was committed, increasing the risk of re-traumatisation; • Refugees may not consider rehabilitation as a priority. Their main concerns may focus on resettlement, finding a job and housing, tracing family, etc.; • The specific needs of refugees and asylum-seekers must be reflected in the holistic rehabilitation offered. State responsibility for the provision and funding of services – the right to rehabilitation obligates states to either provide rehabilitation directly through state services, or fund services provided by non-state medical, legal and other facilities, including those administered by NGOs.5 The degree to which a state accepts responsibility will also impact on the availability, appropriateness and accessibility of services, as illustrated in the diagram on p.20. 5. UN CAT, General Comment no.3 (2012), CAT/C/GC/3, 13 December 2013, paragraph 15. 24 International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims