22
GÄFGEN v. GERMANY JUDGMENT
82. Referring, in particular, to Articles 1 and 15 of the United Nations
Convention against Torture (see paragraph 64 above), the applicant argued
that the treatment to which he had been subjected in order to force him to
confess should be characterised as torture.
(ii) The Government
83. As in their submissions before the Chamber, the Government
recognised that, regrettably, Article 3 had been violated during the
applicant’s questioning on 1 October 2002. They stressed, however, that the
applicant had only been threatened with severe pain if he did not inform the
police about J.’s whereabouts. They contested that there had been additional
threats of sexual assault upon the applicant. They further contested that the
injuries the applicant had suffered had been caused during the interrogation
in question and that he had been forced to walk without shoes at Birstein.
He had suffered skin lesions when he was arrested at Frankfurt am Main
airport. They underlined that until now, the applicant had claimed that E.
had hit him only once on the chest and that his head had only once hit the
wall. The domestic courts had not found the additional threats or injuries to
have been established.
84. The Government further pointed out that police officers D. and E.
had resorted to the method of interrogation in question in order to save the
life of J., which they had considered to be at great risk. They had not known
that J. had already been killed at that time.
(iii) The third-party interveners
(α) J.’s parents
85. J.’s parents endorsed the Government’s submissions. They pointed
out that the applicant’s various injuries, including the injury below his
collarbone, were now for the first time alleged to have been inflicted during
the interrogation on 1 October 2002. However, the applicant had previously
admitted that he had already sustained those injuries during his arrest on
30 September 2002. This admission was contained in a book he had
published in 2005 (Allein mit Gott – der Weg zurück (“Alone With God –
The Way Back”), pp. 57-61), dealing, inter alia, with the criminal
investigations and the trial against him. In a chapter entitled “The arrest”,
the applicant reproduced a copy of the medical certificate issued by a police
doctor on 4 October 2002 (see paragraph 21 above) in order to show which
injuries had been inflicted on him during his arrest on 30 September 2002.
That same certificate was now being used by him in order to support his
claim that the injuries were sustained during his interrogation. His injuries
were not, therefore, connected with his interrogation on 1 October 2002.
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents