A/HRC/7/3 page 9 constitutes torture when it is carried out by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of public officials.14 In a 1997 decision on a case of custodial rape the European Court of Human Rights acknowledged that “rape of a detainee by an official of the State must be considered to be an especially grave and abhorrent form of ill-treatment given the ease with which the offender can exploit the vulnerability and weakened resistance of the victim” and “rape leaves deep psychological scars on the victims which do not respond to the passage of time as quickly as other forms of physical and mental violence”.15 35. In the area of international criminal law, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia decisions in the Celebici and Furundzija cases have contributed to the international recognition of rape as a form of torture.16 Also, international criminal tribunals, in their jurisprudence, have broadened the scope of crimes of sexual violence that can be prosecuted as rape to include oral sex and vaginal or anal penetration through the use of objects or any part of the aggressor’s body.17 This is crucial because in many countries rape is still defined as “carnal access”, reducing it to penetration with the male sexual organ. It is noteworthy that other forms of sexual violence, whether defined as rape or not, may constitute torture or ill-treatment18 and must not be dealt with as minor offences.19 14 For instance, the Committee against Torture found in its decision V.L. v. Switzerland (CAT/C/37/D/262/2005) that “the sexual abuse by the police in this case constitutes torture even though it was perpetrated outside formal detention facilities”, para. 8.10; see also Mejía v. Perú, Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, annual report 1995, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.91. Doc. 7. rev., case 10, 970. 15 European Court of Human Rights, Aydin v. Turkey (57/1996/676/866), 25 September 1997. 16 See judgements on Prosecutor v. Delalic, et al., case No. IT-96-21-T, 16 November 1998 and Prosecutor v. Furundzija, case No. IT-95-17/1-T, 10 December 1998. 17 International Criminal Court, Elements of Crimes, article 8 (2) (b) (xxii)-1 of the ICC Elements of Crimes. 18 For instance, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights resorted to the international jurisprudence on rape to conclude that “the acts of sexual violence to which an inmate was submitted under an alleged finger vaginal ‘examination’ constituted sexual rape that due to its effects constituted torture.” See Miguel Castro-Castro Prison v. Peru, Inter-American Court of Human Rights judgement of 25 November 2006, para. 312. 19 As for example in a case currently under consideration in Mexico (Ana María Velasco contra Doroteo Blas Marcelo, 79/2006, juzgado Primero Penal de Tenango de Valle, Estado de México), where a policeman forced his penis into her mouth and was charged with having committed a “libidinous act”. In relation to the same incident, the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture and the Special Rapporteur on violence against women sent a joint allegation letter to the Government of Mexico on 18 December 2006 concerning, inter alia, the sexual abuse of a group of women by police officers during incidents in San Salvador Atenco on 3 and 4 May 2006, to which the Government responded on 17 May 2007.