PART B – International standards in the Istanbul Protocol with such bodies57 v. Be provided with effective protection58 vi. Compel competent authorities to carry out an investigation;59 and vii. The right of effective access to the investigatory procedure,60 including the right to undergo a timely medical examination.61 In principle, any allegation of torture triggers an obligation on the part of the State to investigate the substance of the complaint promptly and impartially. This standard has been affirmed by the UN Committee against Torture,62 the Human Rights Committee,63 the European Court of Human Rights64 and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.65 The obligation to investigate does not extend to clearly frivolous cases or those that are “manifestly unfounded.” According to the Special Rapporteur on Torture, all torture allegations should be investigated and the alleged perpetrator(s) suspended from duty; however, the latter step should only be taken where the allegation is not manifestly ill-founded.66 Rule 36 (4) of the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners obliges the authorities to deal with any complaint “(u)nless it is evidently frivolous or groundless,” while the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment imposes no such restrictions, providing in Principle 33 (4) that “(e)very request or complaint shall be promptly dealt with and replied to without undue delay.” However, it is difficult to draw this line. The Section on effective remedies, below, will give further guidance on international standards addressing the right of torture victims to have their allegations investigated. 23 For an investigation to be “effective” under international human rights law, it must be: 1. Prompt 2. Impartial 3. Thorough 1. OBLIGATION OF THE STATE TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS “PROMPTLY” According to the Istanbul Protocol, “States shall ensure that complaints and reports of torture or ill-treatment shall be promptly and effectively investigated.” Articles 12 and 13 of the Convention against Torture and Article 8 of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture both expressly require prompt or immediate investigations upon 67 receipt of complaints of torture. There are no hard and fast rules as to what constitutes “prompt” or “immediate.” The international jurisprudence indicates that it depends on the circumstances of the case but that the words would normally be given their literal meaning. Promptness, according to the UN Committee against Torture, appears to relate not only to the time within which the investigation is commenced, but also the expediency 68 with which it is conducted. The Committee against Torture has also expressed concern about the lack of prompt investigations in its concluding observations.69 Despite the fact that neither the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights nor the European Convention on Human Rights contain express provisions relating to investigations, both the Human Rights Committee and the European Court on Human Rights