01200823 E350/8 torturer. 21 They request the Chamber to rule that the parties may not put questions premised on the truthfulness of torture-tainted evidence. 22 They submit however that annotations or markings subsequently made to evidence obtained under torture are admissible. 23 Since the Accused are charged with torture, torture-tainted evidence may be used against them to prove that the statement was made. 24 Specifically, the existence and circumstances of confessions as well as the identity and biographical details of the confessing persons are said to fall within the exception set out in Article 15?5 9. Noting that S-21 confessions were treated as torture-tainted evidence in Case 001, the Lead Co-Lawyers submit that these confessions are presumed to be torture-tainted and cannot be relied upon for the truth of their contents, unless this presumption is rebutted by the party proposing to rely on the document by requesting a Chamber investigation pursuant to Internal Rule 93(1) into the circumstances under which a confession was made. 26 As to the standard of proof, the Lead Co-Lawyers suggest a standard of "substantial risk" that torture was used. 27 2.3. The NUON Chea Defence's Submissions 10. The NUON Chea Defence submits that since the Supreme Court Chamber is seised with an appeal in Case 002/01 relating to the use of torture-tainted evidence, it is inappropriate for the Trial Chamber to issue a decision on the general use of such evidence. 28 Rather, the Trial Chamber should restrict itself to the specific question put to a witness on the basis of an S-21 confession. 29 In particular, the NUON Chea Defence requests permission to put questions to witnesses in a form similar to that put to Pech Chim30 during proceedings on 24 April 2015 31 and Khoem Boeun alias Yeay Boeun on 5 May 2015. 32 Civil Party Lead Co-Lawyers' Submissions Relating to the Admissibility and Permissible Uses of Evidence Obtained Through Torture, E350/3, 21 May 2015 ("Lead Co-Lawyers' Submissions"), paras 16, 18-19; T. 25 May 2015, p. 21. 22 Lead Co-Lawyers' Submissions, para. 18; T. 25 May 2015, p. 21. 23 Lead Co-Lawyers' Submissions, para. 17. 24 Lead Co-Lawyers' Submissions, paras 16, 19. 25 Lead Co-Lawyers' Submissions, para. 16. 26 Lead Co-Lawyers' Submissions, para. 20; T. 25 May 2015, pp. 21-23, 25. 27 T. 25 May 2015, pp. 24-26. 28 NUON Chea's Submissions Regarding the Use of "Torture-Tainted Evidence" in the Case 002/02 Trial, E350, 21 May 2015 ("NUON Chea Defence's Submissions"), paras 9, 11. 29 NUON Chea Defence's Submissions, para. 11; cf T. 27 April 2015, p. 25 ("I would like the Chamber [ ... ] to include in its written decision, how we should deal with reading from notes from Krang Ta Chan records."). 30 T. 24 April, p. 30 ("Have you ever come to learn that Sae implicated you and your brother as belonging to his network?"); see a/so, T. 24 April 2015, pp. 31-33. 31 NUON Chea Defence's Submissions, paras 4,9; T. 25 May 2015, pp. 27, 37, 39. 32 NUON Chea Defence's Submissions, para. 7; T. 5 May 2015, pp. 29-34. 21 Decision on Evidence Obtained through Torture, Public, 5 February 2016 5