to measure prosecutorial performance has a damaging impact on judges’ and prosecutors’ abilities and willingness to investigate claims of torture and other ill-treatment. The failure of states to properly investigate, prosecute and punish perpetrators of torture and other ill-treatment is another factor that contributes to torture and other ill-treatment remaining a reality in the OSCE region. States sometimes fail to provide independent and effective investigations into acts of torture and, when they do, investigations are often carried out without adequate powers and resources. Even where investigations do result in convictions, punishments do not always reflect the severity of the crime and, in some countries, convicted perpetrators are allowed to return to their law enforcement roles. Many victims are dissuaded from making allegations of torture or other ill-treatment by the difficulties in accessing justice. In some instances, they can even face prosecution if their allegations do not result in convictions. Inadequate internal complaint systems and the failure to provide defence lawyers, civil society organizations (CSOs) and independent monitoring bodies with regular access to all places of detention prevents detainees from accessing information about their rights and the opportunity to make complaints.4 Obstacles to the reporting of torture, in addition to the failure to properly investigate, prosecute and punish perpetrators of torture, masks the true scale of the problem across the OSCE region. In addition to direct incentives for acts of torture and other ill-treatment, there are also factors within criminal justice systems that facilitate their use. The overuse of pre-trial detention can facilitate the use of torture and other ill-treatment in several ways. When suspects are held in detention, they are at a much higher risk of being exposed to torture or other ill-treatment by both law enforcement officials and other detainees, and they face additional barriers to getting incidences of torture properly investigated. Pre-trial detention and prison conditions in several OSCE participating States are so poor that they, themselves, amount to ill-treatment.5 There is evidence to suggest that suspects are sometimes placed in pre-trial detention in order to “persuade” them to plead guilty or confess.6 4 5 6 Note that allegations of torture shall be investigated ex officio, even without a formal complaint. For prison settings, the revised UN Standard Minimum Rules for the treatment of prisoners (Nelson Mandela Rules) in Rule 71 explicitly state that a prompt, impartial and effective investigation has to be initiated whenever there are reasonable grounds to believe that an act of torture or other ill-treatment has been committed. See Guidance Document on the Nelson Mandela Rules (Warsaw: ODIHR/PRI, 2018), section 3.3. Investigations, page 91. See also Fair Trials, “Rights behind bars – Access to justice for victims of violent crime suffered in pre-trial detention or immigration detention”, (2019). See following section on the abusive use and conditions of pre-trial detention; see also, ECtHR, “Factsheet – Detention conditions and treatment of prisoners”, May 2020. See e.g., Council of Europe, Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) Resolution on Abuse of pretrial detention in State parties to the European Convention for Human Rights, Res. 2077 (2015) para. 7.1. 7