stated that the use of these substances being potentially dangerous for health can produce effects such as respiratory problems, nausea, vomiting, irritation of the respiratory tract, irritation of the tear ducts and eyes, spasms, chest pain, dermatitis and allergies. In strong doses it may cause necrosis of the tissue in the respiratory or digestive tract, pulmonary oedema or internal haemorrhaging. Although according to the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction70 tear gas is not considered a chemical weapon and its use is authorized for the purpose of law enforcement, the Court concurred with European Committee for the Prevention of Torture stating that there can be no justification for the use of such gases against an individual who has already been taken under the control of the law enforcement authorities. In the above-cited case, the Court discussed whether the use of gas was compatible with Article 3 of the Convention and concluded that spraying the gas into the applicant’s face while the applicant was under the control of law enforcement agents amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment.71 It should well be noted that even in the most difficult circumstances, such as the fight against terrorism and organised crime, the Convention prohibits in absolute terms torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, irrespective of the victim’s conduct.72 The Convention makes no provision for exceptions and no derogation from Article 3 is permissible even in the event of a public emergency threatening the life of the nation.73 The approach of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture towards use of pepper spray is also important. In particular, in its report to the Czech Government, CPT stated that there can be no justification for the use of pepper spray in confined spaces. Even if exceptionally it needs to be used in open spaces, there should be clearly defined safeguards in place. For example, persons exposed to pepper spray should be granted immediate access to a medical doctor and be offered measures of relief. Further, CPT believes that such gases should not form part of the standard equipment of prison staff.74 In the same report, the CPT recommended the Government to elaborate a clear directive on the use of pepper spray. The Committee also stressed the importance of availability of information about the qualifications, training and skills of staff members authorized to use pepper spray.75 In this regard, we welcome the prohibition by the legislation of the use of pepper spray in confined areas but the law still does not prohibit the use of tear gas under the same conditions. 70 71 72 73 74 75 Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction, adopted 13 January 1993 ALİ GÜNEŞ v. TURKEY , paras. 37-43. Labita v. Italy, no. 26772/95, par. 119. Ibid. par. 119. Report of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture to the Czech Government, CPT/Inf (2009) 8, par. 46. იქვე. NATIONAL PREVENTIVE MECHANISM OF GEORGIA 49