002/19-09-2007-ECCC-OCIJ-PTC 42. Similarly, Article 29 of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights’ “Guidelines and Measures for the Prohibition and Prevention of Torture, Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in Africa” (the Robben Island Guidelines) provide that states should: ‘Ensure that any statement obtained through the use of torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment shall not be admissible as evidence in any proceedings except against persons accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made.’33 [emphasis added] 43. The Council of Europe (COE) has also endorsed the Article 15 exclusionary rule in its entirety. In 2005, the COE Parliamentary Assembly adopted a resolution on the Lawfulness of detentions by the United States in Guantanamo Bay. Among other things, the Assembly called on the US Government: ‘…to respect its obligations under international law and the Constitution of the United States to exclude any statement established to have been made as a result of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, except against a person accused of such ill-treatment as evidence that the statement was made. ‘34 [emphasis added] E. Admitting Statements Obtained by Torture Violates the Right to Fair Trial 44. The strict link between the prohibition of torture and the right to a fair trial has been established in the jurisprudence of regional human rights courts and UN treaty bodies. 45. In Singarasa v. Sri Lanka, the Human Rights Committee found a violation of Article 14 of the ICCPR, read in conjunction with Article 7, as the complainant had been “forced to sign a confession and subsequently had to assume the burden of proof that it was extracted under duress and was not voluntary.”35 46. The Inter-American Court and Commission on Human Rights have found that the use of evidence obtained by torture violates the right to a fair trial under Article 8 of the American Convention on Human Rights. 36 For example, in Manríquez v. Mexico, the Inter-American Commission found that, ‘…the confession obtained through torture was in effect the only evidence relied upon in the judgment of the court of first instance to convict Manuel Manríquez as direct perpetrator of the homicide of which he was accused. The Commission also concludes 33 Guidelines and Measures for the Prohibition and Prevention of Torture, Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in Africa (Robben Island Guidelines), African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 32nd Sess. (2002). 34 Res’n 1433(2005) of Parliamentary Assembly on the legality of the detention of persons by the United States in Guantanamo Bay, 26 Apr. 2005, para. 8(vi). See also para. 10(iv) (addressing a similar call to Member States of the COE). 35 HR Committee, Nallaratnam Singarasa v. Sri Lanka, No. 1033/2001, CCPR/C/81/D/1033/2001, 23 Aug. 2004, para. 7.4. 36 Inter-Am. Ct of HR, Cantoral Benavides v. Peru, Series C No. 69, 18 Aug. 2000, paras. 132-133. Amicus Curie Application (AI, ICJ, REDRESS) 12/15