ESSEX PAPER 3: INITIAL GUIDANCE ON THE INTERPRETATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE UN NELSON MANDELA RULES for what prison staff must do and refrain from doing but also what prisoners do to themselves and to each other and to the treatment of visitors.26 A violation of the prohibition of other ill-treatment cannot be justified on grounds of lack of resources which is critical on issues such as overcrowding and inadequate food, healthcare and accommodation. For example, citing the Inter-American Court on Human Rights, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture has noted that: Treating all persons deprived of their liberty with humanity and with respect for their dignity is a fundamental and universally applicable rule, the application of which, at a minimum, cannot be dependent on the material resources available in the State party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (para. 4). In this regard, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has consistently affirmed that States cannot invoke economic hardship to justify imprisonment conditions that do not comply with the minimum international standards and respect the inherent dignity of the human being.27 While recognizing that penitentiary systems are almost universally severely underfunded and suffer from decades of accumulated problems, the Special Rapporteur recalls that a lack of financial resources cannot be an excuse for not refurbishing detention facilities, purchasing basic supplies and providing food and medical treatment, among other things.28 ®  à See Chapter 4, Healthcare – Rule 34 Principle of Non-Discrimination The Essex Group noted that the non-discrimination clause in Rule 2 provides specific illustration of forms of discrimination but also includes the clause ‘or any other status’. The inclusion of the clause ‘any other status’ is in line with a number of other international instruments. In common with these instruments, the list provided is illustrative and not exhaustive. The Essex Group noted that while the list of illustrative grounds for discrimination was not changed from the original text of the SMR during the revision process, the word ‘any’ was added. This underscores states’ intention to clarify that the term ‘discrimination’ should be understood as reflecting and recognising the current meaning of the term in international law and standards, as it continues to expand. For example, existing international human rights standards and norms prohibit discrimination on one or more grounds such as race, colour, sex, language, religion or conviction, political or other opinion or belief, membership of a particular social group, status, activities, descent, national, ethnic, indigenous or social origin, nationality, age, economic position, property, disability, marital For examples of inter-prisoner violence cases, see Pantea v Romania Application No. 33343/96 (ECHR, 3 June 2003) and DF v Latvia Application no. 11160/07 (ECHR, 29 October 2013); For examples on self-harm, see Keenan v. the United Kingdom Application no. 27229/95(ECHR, 3 March, 2001) and Renolde v France Application no. 5608/05 (ECHR, 16 October 2008); and on treatment of visitors, see Wainwright V. The United Kingdom Application no. 12350/04 (ECHR, 26 September 2006) 26  Interim Report of the Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment at para. 35. 27  Interim Report of the Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment at para. 46. 28  Penal Reform International and the Essex Human Rights Centre | 12