Briefing Paper: Use of Tools of Torture in OSCE participating States detailed information on a wider range of equipment can be found on the Omega Research Foundation website.9 a. Body-worn electric shock devices These devices, often known as stun cuffs, stun sleeves and stun belts, are designed to be attached or affixed to the body of a person in custody, enabling the application of an electric shock via remote control. Existing models are designed to be fastened to the waist, wrist, ankle and leg. Voltage, duration of shock, number of possible repeated shocks, and remote control range, vary between models. They are often marketed as a discreet form of restraint for use on persons deprived of their liberty during court appearances, transfers and/or the provision of medical care. Physical/medical effects and human rights concerns: Activation of a body-worn electric shock device causes severe pain to the wearer for the duration of the shock, leading to temporary incapacitation and compliance through pain, as well as possible longer term effects. Loss of voluntary muscle control can result in falls and secondary injuries. Even when such devices are worn but not activated, they constitute ill-treatment, maintaining the wearer in constant fear of instant pain for as long as they are worn. As such, the wearing of body-worn electric shock devices is inherently degrading to the dignity of the person. Omega considers that there are other, less harmful means of guarding persons in custody. Therefore, the use of body-worn electric shock devices in no circumstances constitutes the least harmful means of force necessary to achieve a legitimate law enforcement objective, meaning they do not meet a legitimate law enforcement objective that cannot be effectively accomplished with safer and less abusive alternatives. These concerns are shared by international human rights bodies. The Council of Europe’s Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) opposes the use of stun belts and similar devices “for controlling the movements of detained persons, whether inside or outside places of deprivation of liberty”, stating that they are inherently degrading and with a particularly high scope for misuse.10 The UN Committee against Torture (UN CAT) has recommended that the use of stun belts to restrain those in custody be abolished, stating that “their use almost invariably leads to breaches of article 16 of the Convention [duty of the state to prevent acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment]”.11 The upcoming UNODC Resource book on the use of force and firearms in law enforcement advises that electric shock belts should not be used for law enforcement, stating “experts have agreed that there is no tactical utility to any of these that cannot be achieved with another device, and the risk of arbitrary force amounting to torture or other forms of ill-treatment is too great.”12 9 See Omega Research Foundation and Amnesty International, The Human Rights Impact of Law Enforcement Equipment, April 2015, https://omegaresearchfoundation.org/publications/human-rights-impact-lawenforcement-equipment-april-2015 accessed 17 May 2017; Omega Research Foundation, Visual Glossary, https://omegaresearchfoundation.org/resources/visual-glossary-introduction accessed 17 May 2017. 10 European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT), Electrical discharge weapons, CPT/Inf(2010)28-part, https://rm.coe.int/16806cce1c accessed 11 May 2017, para. 74. 11 Committee against Torture, Concluding Observations on the Report submitted by the United States of America, 23rd and 24th sessions, May 2000, UN doc. A/55/44(SUPP) paras. 175-180, para. 179. 12 UNODC Resource book on the use of force and firearms in law enforcement, advance copy, May 2017, p. 82. 6