01200825 E350/S Ta Chan were physically tortured,46 and that the Trial Chamber therefore cannot conclude that all statements were obtained through torture. 47 It further argues that, in the event of doubt about how a statement was obtained, such statement cannot be used. 48 15. The KHIEU Samphan Defence also submits that, according to Cambodian Law, statements made under physical or mental coercion are inadmissible. 49 As both the Cambodian regulations and the CAT have the same objective, the same standards apply.50 3. BACKGROUND 3.1. OCIJ and PTC Decisions on Torture-Tainted Evidence 16. In 2009, the Co-Investigating Judges (CIJ) issued an order on the proper use of evidence which may have been obtained through torture. 51 In interpreting the CAT, the CIJ first ruled that there was a category of information contained within S-21 confessions which was not tainted by torture and therefore not subject to Article 15. This category included: handwritten annotations made by someone not subject to torture; preliminary biographical material (if established that it was obtained prior to the person's arrival at S-21); "any objective information [... ] which exists independently of the interrogation, such as the date of the person's arrest"; and biographical information such as the name, age, position and work unit of the person subject to torture. 52 17. The CIJ further held there was a "limited exception" to Article 15 allowing evidence obtained by torture to be used "against the person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made". They held that this encompassed not only criminal proceedings against alleged direct perpetrators of torture, but also instances where accused are charged by superior responsibility or joint criminal enterprise because "it is equally, if not more important, to deter those who are higher in the chain of command" as those direct perpetrators implementing the policy of using torture. 53 The CIJ addressed in turn two rationales behind Article 15: to remove an important incentive for the use of torture and to prevent the use of unreliable KHIEU Samphan Defence's Submissions, para. 7; T. 25 May 2015, pp. 43, 46. KHIEU Samphan Defence's Submissions, para. 8. 48 KHlEU Samphan Defence's Submissions, para. 9; T. 25 May 2015, pp. 45-46. 49 KHIEU Samphan Defence's Submissions, para. 10; T. 25 May 2015, pp. 43, 47. 50 KHIEU Samphan Defence's Submissions, paras 11-l3. 51 Order on use of statements which were or may have been obtained by torture, Dl30/8, 28 July 2009 ("OCIJ Order"). 52 OCIJ Order, para. 19. 53 OCIJ Order, paras 20, 22. 46 47 Decision on Evidence Obtained through Torture, Public, 5 February 2016 7