“acquiescence” than the Committee against Torture, thus narrowing the scope of the domestic prohibition of torture. Additionally, US law may not cover degrading treatment or punishment to the same extent as the CAT. 26. The Bush administration interpreted provisions against torture and ill-treatment in ways that defied and greatly weakened the prohibition of torture, drastically restricting the range of acts that would constitute torture as per the international definition. It appears that the Bush Administration interpreted international standards on torture in a way that aimed at institutionalizing a system effectively authorizing and perpetuating torture in violation of international law. 27. The Obama administration undertook a number of positive steps, stressing the US commitment to Common Article 3 as a minimum baseline for treatment in detention, including detention conditions and the interrogation of detainees arrested in the context of any armed conflict. It has also reaffirmed the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment of individuals detained in one of the facilities it operates, controls or owns, and asserted that the prohibition applies to all areas that it “controls as a governmental authority” outside of its territory, such as Guantánamo. However, while explicitly prohibiting abusive techniques, the revised Army Field Manual, which serves as guidance for interrogations, may still result in some practices amounting to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. ODIHR also encourages the United States to clearly acknowledge that the torture and ill-treatment prohibition applies to all areas over which it exercises “effective control”, including detention facilities abroad. 28. Detention and interrogation practices at Guantánamo. A wide variety of sources, including leaked ICRC reports and official reports have pointed to numerous instances of abuse at Guantánamo under the Bush administration. Interviews with former Guantánamo detainees have provided ODIHR with further information on the severity of abuses inflicted upon them during their detention and interrogations. Practices were reportedly designed to break detainees’ will, cause stress and make them co-operate with and wholly dependent on their interrogators who had total control over their level of isolation, access to comfort items and basic needs such as access to food, drinkable water, sunlight or fresh air. The lack of co-operation with interrogators and non-compliance with constantlychanging prison rules were punished, including by the removal of basic items and prolonged isolation. Documented cases corroborated by ODIHR interviews of former detainees indicate the routine use of excessive force against detainees by the Initial Reaction Forces and during the force-feeding of hunger strikers. 29. These practices contravened the prohibition of torture as defined under international law. They appear to have been inflicted intentionally by government officials in order to extract a confession, obtain information or punish detainees. They have been a source of severe pain or suffering as reported by detainees, leading to the deterioration of their mental health and to physical injuries, including with long-term consequences in some cases. 12