Inhuman and degrading treatment is not defined by international acts, but,
generically, it is included in the category of ill-treatment, seriously affecting
human dignity. Such acts cause physical or moral injuries or suffering to the
victim, and are likely to cause significant psychological pain.
Torture is different from inhuman or degrading treatment by the intensity of
the pain it causes, the suffering caused to the victim, in the first place; secondly,
torture implies an intention of the person who holds public authority and causes
significant suffering to the victim.
Based on its Constitution, Romania is a democratic and social state of rule of
law, where human dignity, citizen rights and freedoms are supreme and guaranteed
values. The Romanian Constitution regulates under “Title II. Fundamental Rights,
Freedoms and Duties”, the right to life and physical and psychological integrity,
while art. 281 and 282 of the Criminal Code incriminate and punish torture and
subjection to ill treatment.
One of the most efficient means to prevent torture and ill treatment is to
monitor the treatment and detention conditions of persons deprived from
freedom in some form of custody, by means of unannounced and regular visits
performed by independent National Prevention Mechanisms, part of the system
protecting persons deprived from freedom. For persons who are deprived from
freedom, coming into direct contact with the members of visiting teams, who are
interested in their conditions, is a form of protection, as well as moral support. Visits
facilitate direct dialogue with the authorities and the officials in charge with
managing detention places, establishing constructive work relations, which could
help obtain the authorities’ points of view on work conditions and identify the
relevant issues.
In the last three decades, international and regional human rights bodies have
drawn up many lists of measures that the states have to pass to prevent torture. Does
any of these mechanisms work? Professor Richard Carver (University of Liverpool)
undertook a study on this. The study is the first systematic analysis of the
effectiveness of torture prevention, and the primary research was undertaken in 16
countries, examining their experience on torture and prevention mechanisms for a
5