2.3 Torture prevention and state obligations It is well recognised that States have a duty to prevent torture and there are a number of international, regional and national organisations that focus on ensuring that the administration of justice operates in a way that will lower, if not eliminate, the potential for torture. When working directly with survivors of torture, the service provider will want to be aware of the duty of a State to prevent torture and to ensure they support those survivors who may choose to seek justice given the violation of a most basic human right. There is ample good authority of this duty and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights says that States have a duty to prevent torture and that this includes taking positive measures: “Considering the particular importance placed on the prohibition of torture, the traditional obligations of States to respect, to protect and to fulfil human rights is complemented by a further obligation to prevent torture and other forms of illtreatment. “States are required to take positive measures to prevent its occurrence. In the case of torture, the requirement that States expeditiously institute national implementing measures is an integral part of the international obligation to prohibit this practice.” For further reference see: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/NHRI/Torture_Prevention_Guide.pdf The approach of the Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture to the concept of prevention of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment under the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment is the following: “Prevention is a multifaceted and interdisciplinary endeavour… there is more to the prevention of torture and ill-treatment than compliance with legal commitments. In this sense, the prevention of torture and ill-treatment embraces – or should embrace – as many as possible of those things which in a given situation can contribute towards the lessening of the likelihood or risk of torture or ill-treatment occurring. Such an approach requires not only that there be compliance with relevant international obligations and standards in both form and substance but that attention also be paid to the whole range of other factors relevant to the experience and treatment of persons deprived of their liberty and which by their very nature will be context specific.” For further reference see ‘Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment’; Twelfth session; Geneva, 15-19, November 2010. http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cat/opcat/ConceptPrevention.htm http://bim.lbg.ac.at/files/sites/bim/Atlas%20of%20Torture_Brochure_0.pdf For some organisations it is important to distinguish between two different forms of torture prevention. This distinction is based on when the intervention occurs and the approach that is employed. 10