UN TREATY BODIES 1 treatment, though such “distinctions depend on the nature, purpose and severity of the treatment applied.”17 Therefore, in its jurisprudence, the HRC often does not specify precisely which aspect of the prohibition has been breached, but simply states that there has been a violation of Article 7. The HRC has indicated that the assessment of whether particular treatment constitutes a violation of Article 7 “depends on all circumstances of the case, such as the duration and manner of the treatment, its physical or mental effects as well as the sex, age and state of health of the victim.”18 Elements such as the victim’s age and mental health may therefore aggravate the effect of certain treatment so as to bring it within Article 7. However, it is not sufficient that treatment be capable of producing an adverse physical or mental effect; it must be proven that this has occurred in a specific case.19 The second sentence of Article 7 ensures that the prohibition is understood to include any medical or scientific experimentation conducted without the free consent of the subject. This specific prohibition was a response to atrocities committed by doctors in Nazi concentration camps during World War II. In this regard, the Committee has stated that special protection is necessary for persons not capable of giving valid consent, in particular those deprived of their liberty, who should not be subjected to any medical or scientific experimentation that may be detrimental to their health.20 In contrast to the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT), discussed below, there is no requirement in the ICCPR for a level of involvement or acquiescence by a State official for an act to be qualified as torture or ill-treatment. Rather, “It is the duty of the State Party to afford everyone protection through legislative and other measures as may be necessary against the acts prohibited by Article 7, whether inflicted by people acting in their official capacity, outside their official capacity or in a private capacity.”21 Ibid. §4. Vuolanne v Finland, HRC Communication No. 265/1987, 7 April 1989, §9.2. Ibid. 20 Ibid. §7. 21 HRC, General Comment No. 20, 1992, §2. 17 18 19 8