produces, under determined circumstances, such a degree of moral anguish that it may be considered ‘psychological torture.’”454 The Inter-american Regional System 3 The Inter-American Commission became the first international adjudicatory body to recognise rape as torture in Raquel Martí de Mejía v Peru.455 The Commission noted that rape is a method of psychological torture that often has as an objective the humiliation of the victim, as well as her or his family or community. The Inter-American Court and Commission have thus shown greater flexibility than other international instances in adopting an expansive definition of torture and State responsibility, based on the need to guarantee fundamental principles. 3.1.2 Cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment Article 6 of the IACPPT provides in part: “States Parties… shall take effective measures to prevent and punish other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment within their jurisdiction.” The IACPPT does not, however, provide a definition of such conduct, or indicate where the line lies between torture and other forms of ill-treatment.456 The Inter-American Court and Commission therefore adopted the distinctions developed in European jurisprudence (discussed in detail in sections 2.1.2 and 2.1.3) as its own in Luis Lizardo Cabrera v Dominican Republic.457 Furthermore, the Commission considered that both the ACHR and the IACPPT conferred upon it a certain amount of latitude to evaluate whether an act or practice constitutes torture or other ill-treatment in light of its intensity or seriousness. Such classification should be done on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the peculiarities of the case, the duration of the suffering, the physical and mental effects on the victim, and the personal circumstances of the victim.458 The Inter-American Court has taken a similar approach to the Commission. In Loayza Tamayo v Peru, the Court indicated that the distinction rests in part Urrutia v Guatemala, IACHR (Series C) No. 103, judgement of 27 November 2003, §92. See also Tibi v Ecuador (2004), op. cit., §149; Servellón-García v Honduras (2006), op. cit., §99. 455 Martí de Mejía v Peru (1996), op. cit. 456 Lizardo Cabrera v Dominican Republic, Case 10832, Report No. 35/96, 17 February 1998, §76. 457 Ibid. §§77–80. 458 Ibid. §§82–83. 454 98