01200843 E350/8 5.4.2. Derivative Evidence 63. In addition to evidence established to have been obtained by torture, parties may seek to use other evidence derived from tainted evidence, that is evidence which was not itself the product of torture, but was nonetheless discovered through torture-tainted evidence. 127 Cambodian law is silent on the use of derivative evidence an.d Article 15 refers exclusively to the exclusion of "any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture" without further precision. For these reasons, the Chamber considers the preparatory work of the CAT and other international jurisprudence. 64. The preparatory work of Article 15 suggests that the drafters did not intend to encompass derivative evidence within the exclusionary rule. An early draft of Article 15 submitted by the International Association of Penal Law supported the exclusion of "[a]ny oral or written statement or confession obtained by means of torture or any other evidence derived therefrom.,,128 The underlined language was excluded from the final version of Article 15, suggesting the drafters intentionally omitted derivative evidence. 65. The Chamber further notes that in Cambodia, as in most civil law countries, the general rule is that all evidence is admissible. 129 This weighs in favour of permitting the invocation of derivative evidence. However, there is no consensus among the. international sources as to whether the exclusionary rule should apply to derivative evidence and, if so, under what circumstances. 130 66. The European Court of Human Rights addressed the issue in a case in which it found that during police investigations an accused was subjected to a method of interrogation amounting to inhuman treatment not reaching the threshold of torture. The Court declined to categorically extend the exclusionary rule to derivative evidence obtained under these circumstances, instead finding that the invocation of such evidence will render a proceeding unfair only if it has an impact on an Accused's conviction or sentence. l3l Where evidence 127 A typical example of such evidence would be the body of the victim found after the authorities had tortured the suspect to confess as to its location. See Gafgen v. Germany, paras 15-16,73-74, 171.. 128 UN Doc. E/CNAINGO/213, Draft Convention for the Prevention and Suppression of Torture, Submitted by the International Association of Penal Law, 15 January 1978 (emphasis added). 129 Cambodian Code of Criminal Procedure, Article 321; Internal Rule 87(1). 130 Gafgen v. Germany, paras 69-74, 174 ("The Court notes that there is no clear consensus among the Contracting States to the Convention, the courts of other States and other human rights monitoring institutions about the exact scope of application of the exclusionary rule.") 131 Gafgen v. Germany, para. 178; See also, JaUoh v. Germany (Application no. 54810100), ECtHR Grand Chamber, JUdgment, 11 July 2006, paras 104-108. Decision on Evidence Obtained through Torture, Public, 5 February 2016 25