KEY RECOMMENDATIONS AND POSSIBLE NEXT STEPS Based on the discussions conducted in the framework of the activities, several important follow-up actions were identified, namely: 1. Clarifying and strengthening standards, especially with regard to a) the standards applicable to confessions and statements obtained by other forms of ill-treatment falling short of torture; b) the standards applicable to other evidence gathered or derived from information obtained by torture and especially by other forms of ill-treatment; c) The domestic procedures applicable to exclude the evidence obtained by torture and ill-treatment, especially concerning the introduction of an explicit regime for the admission of evidence alleged to have been obtained by torture or illtreatment that put in place a strict reverse burden of proof (see also below the contributions of Ilze Tramaka “Reducing reliance on torture evidence”, Rupert Skilbeck “Excluding Confessions obtained by torture”) 2. Collecting further data and conducting research, especially on how the exclusion of torture tainted evidence is implemented at the national level 3. Raise awareness and strengthening the capacity of relevant national stakeholders by developing guidance documents and training material (see also below Catherine Kent “Implementing the Exclusionary Rule: Procedural Aspects, the Role of the Legal Profession and National Law, Policy and Practice”) 4. Always ensure that exclusionary rules are embedded in a broader system of torture prevention guarantees, such as the proper functioning of procedural safeguards and the development of effective information gathering techniques according to the Principles on Effective Interviewing for Investigations and Information Gathering (Méndez Principles) (see also below the (see also below the contributions of Ilze Tramaka “Reducing reliance on torture evidence”, Rupert Skilbeck “Excluding Confessions obtained by torture”) To successfully implement the identified follow-up actions, it would be ideal to ensure a broad engagement of all relevant stakeholders of the OSCE area from the very beginning. During the consultations, the following ideas for next step were collected.  The CAT Committee could systematically review the implementation of Article 15 CAT in all reporting cycles and guide the States Parties with concrete and coherent recommendations, the implementation of which should be followed up in the next reporting cycle. The CAT Committee should also consider issuing a General Comment on Article 15 of the CAT to make the corpus of recommendations already developed more easily accessible and guide States parties in the implementation of this provision.  The European Court of Human Rights could clarify its jurisprudence concerning exclusionary rules. It could particularly reflect on whether the distinction made in Gäfgen is still appropriate or, rather, if it is time to opt for a stricter application of the exclusionary rule. The current approach carries the risk of rendering the rules on the admissibility of torture-tainted evidence - and their preventive rationale - irrelevant in practice.  The European Union could take further steps to eradicate torture and ill-treatment in the Member States. While considerable steps have been taken to set and guarantee minimum standards when it comes to certain safeguards in the criminal justice proceedings, additional 13