Part I psychiatric consultations, as well as other cases of failure to conduct psychiatric examinations of detainees, as revealed by the NMPT, and taking account of the argumentation presented above, the issue requires re-examination by the Ministry of the Interior and Administration. 5. The Istanbul Protocol – a tool underused in practice According to the CAT’s General Comment No. 3 on the implementation of Article14 of the Convention against Torture, sates parties, in order to ensure to the victim the right to prompt, fair and adequate compensation for torture or ill-treatment, shall promptly, effectively and impartially investigate and examine the case of any individual who alleges she or he has been subjected to torture or ill-treatment. Such an investigation should include an independent physical and psychological forensic examination as provided for in the Istanbul Protocol. The Istanbul Protocol was drawn up by an expert group working under the auspices of the United Nations. It contains methods of effective investigation and documentation of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The document is annexed to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights resolution no. 2000/43 of 20 April 2000146. The authors emphasize that the manual was drawn up to enable States to address one of the most fundamental concerns in protecting individuals from torture – effective documentation. It contains the principles to be followed in the work of experts in fields such as forensic medicine, psychiatry and psychology. It indicates the specific duties of entities responsible for evaluating persons deprived of their liberty. It also emphasizes that only joint and coordinated action of persons who are in contact with victims of torture may contribute to effective disclosure of such cases. The guidelines set out in the Protocol set out minimum standards for assessment of persons who allege torture and ill-treatment and for documenting such assessments. The manual emphasizes that properly developed documentation provides evidence of torture and ill-treatment. This allows the perpetrators of these acts to be held responsible and to eliminate the phenomenon of impunity. In the case Dzwonkowski v. Poland, mentioned above in this chapter, and in other cases147 the ECHR recalled that state authorities must take all reasonable steps available to them to secure the evidence concerning the incident, in The document’s translation into Polish is available on the CHR website. Judgment of 27 September 2011 in the case Karbowniczek v. Poland, application no. 22339/08; judgment of 9 December 2008 in the case Dzieciak v. Poland, application no. 77766/01. 146 147 53