A/HRC/40/59 29. Where the undue advantage integral to a corrupt transaction per se amounts to torture or ill-treatment, any remedial efforts must be directed simultaneously at both components of the relevant interactive pattern between corruption and torture or illtreatment. Of course, persons coerced to provide undue advantages that per se amount to torture or ill-treatment should not be regarded as perpetrators of corruption, but should be viewed as victims of both corruption and torture or ill-treatment and, accordingly, should receive support throughout any accountability process, and be provided with full redress and rehabilitation. 30. The risk of such profoundly abusive interactions is highest in, but by no means isolated to, contexts of armed conflict or other situations marked by a prevalence of unchecked power, generalized or systemic violence, structural discrimination and impunity. In such contexts, torture and ill-treatment are unlikely to be eradicated, or even significantly reduced, without comprehensive measures towards preventing the abuse of entrusted or appropriated power and ensuring good governance, non-discrimination and the rule of law, most notably through checks and balances, separation of powers and effective monitoring and oversight. In order for such remedial action to be effective, it is vital to stabilize the entire environment, to strengthen the institutions and procedures of good governance and to empower both civil society and (potential) victims, including by alleviating the legal, structural and socioeconomic conditions conducive to corruption, torture and ill-treatment (A/73/207, para. 77 (i)). Instrumentalizing torture or ill-treatment for “undue advantages” 2. 31. The next closest interaction between corruption and torture or ill-treatment is marked by a direct and intended causal connection, namely where acts or threats of torture or ill-treatment are deliberately employed as a tool for obtaining an undue advantage, enforcing a corruption scheme or preventing accountability for corruption. This pattern of abuse is widespread in all regions of the world. It thrives in all contexts, systems or situational “niches” where officials or those acting on their behalf or with their consent or acquiescence are effectively free to exercise coercion arbitrarily and with near-total impunity, whether as a consequence of a complete breakdown of law and order (e.g. armed conflicts and natural disasters), of discriminatory policies and practices (e.g. marginalized communities and irregular migrants) or of corruption schemes exploiting situational vulnerabilities (e.g. prisoners and other institutionalized persons). 32. In many contexts, it is a widespread practice, for example, for corrupt prison staff, soldiers, police officers, border officials or armed non-State actors to deliberately employ acts or threats of torture or ill-treatment as a tool to extort money and other valuables from victims, their families or friends (A/HRC/13/39/Add.5, para. 64). Similarly, detainees or their families may be forced to pay bribes to State officials in order to get them to abstain from torture or ill-treatment or to alleviate cruel, inhuman or degrading prison conditions (e.g. A/HRC/13/39/Add.5, paras. 64–66; and CAT/C/52/2, paras. 80 and 84).12 Another, increasingly widespread, practice is corruption schemes operated in the context of irregular migration, where border officials give access to regular procedures or turn a blind eye on clandestine entries in return for money, valuables or other undue advantages, and enforce this “business model” through the deliberate infliction of violent abuse on any migrant caught crossing the border without complying with their demands (A/HRC/37/50, para. 30). Acts or threats of violence and abuse amounting to torture or ill-treatment are also deliberately employed as a tool for obstructing the prevention, investigation, prosecution and adjudication of corruption, most commonly by: (a) coercing victims or witnesses not to report corruption; (b) coercing false confessions, testimonies or denunciations in order to conceal or evade accountability for corruption; (c) coercing judicial or law enforcement officials into disregarding their duties in the fight against corruption; or (d) intimidating or 12 See also “Report to the Armenian Government on the visit to Armenia carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) from 10 to 21 May 2010”, document CPT/Inf (2011) 24; and Association for the Prevention of Torture and Prison Reform International, Institutional Culture in Detention: A Framework for Preventive Monitoring, 2nd ed. (London, 2015), p. 9. 9