Report of the Polish Commissioner for Human Rights on the Activities of the National Mechanism for the Prevention ... vide space for their abuse. The Court’s longstanding practice has allowed to distinguish between torture and other inhuman or degrading treatment, as well as to formulate a definition of torture used for the first time in the Declaration on the protection of all persons from being subjected to torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment259, and then in the Convention against Torture, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 10 December 1984.260 In the case law of the ECHR, the case of key significance for the formulation of the definition of torture has been the so-called case of Greece261 of 1969 (in which Denmark, Norway, Sweden and the Netherlands filed a collective multi-national application against Greece, concerning the use of torture by security forces during the dictatorship of the so-called black colonels in that country). Torture is defined as inhuman treatment for the purpose of obtaining information or confession, or for the purpose of punishment. Inhuman treatment or punishment, in turn, is defined as severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, for which no justification exists in the given situation. Treatment of an individual may be said to be degrading if it grossly humiliates him/her before others or drives him to act against his will or conscience262. Analysis of the ECHR judgments issued across the period of its work shows a significant change that has taken place over time in the interpretation of torture and other inhuman or degrading treatment. Practices which were not considered torture or inhuman treatment in the 1960s, at present are prohibited which reflects our society’s shift towards increased moral sensitivity. Acts of cruelty are condemned increasingly often. The level of tolerance of various methods and forms of inhuman treatment has reduced. Initially, the Court considered complaints regarding infringement of Article 3 with great caution, describing certain methods and acts without qualifying them as torture. Of greatest importance was the so-called case of Ireland263 considered by the ECHR in the 1970s. It concerned the use by the British po UN General Assembly Resolution 3452 (XXX). Dz. U. of 1989, no. 63, item 378. 261 The so-called case of Greece covered the following applications: 3321/67 Denmark v. Greece, 3322/67 Norway v. Greece, 3323/67 Sweden v. Greece, and 3344/67 Netherlands v. Greece. 262 Cf. A. Kremplewski, Policja a zakaz tortur oraz innego nieludzkiego postępowania, w: Prawa jednostki a prawo karne [Police and the prohibition of torture and other inhuman treatment, in: Rights of individuals in criminal law]. Collective work, edited by M. P. Wędrychowski, Warsaw, Criminal Law Department, Faculty of Law, the University of Warsaw, 1995, pp. 9-39. 263 Ireland v. the United Kingdom; application no. 5310/71, judgment of 18.01.1978. 259 260 90