PART 1: OVERVIEW PAPER INTRODUCTION The use of torture not only amounts to an egregious human rights violation in itself, but also leads to other serious human rights violations, including the violation of the right to a fair trial. It taints the entire criminal justice process, eroding the rule of law and public trust in the system’s ability to deliver justice. The exclusion of torture evidence is thus an important provision supplementing the absolute prohibition of torture. The inadmissibility of evidence obtained by torture is explicitly enshrined by the UN Convention against Torture (CAT) under Article 15. The inadmissibility of torture-tainted evidence is also guaranteed under other international instruments, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and reflected in regional standards. For example, under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the use of statements in breach of Article 3 (prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment) constitutes a violation of the right to a fair trial under Article 6 ECHR.1 At the 27th OSCE Ministerial Council in Tirana, OSCE participating States pledged to prohibit the use of information or a confession obtained through torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment as evidence in any proceedings except against a person accused of torture as evidence that this offence took place.2 Although the exclusionary rule seems to be firmly established in most legal cultures, challenges concerning its application in law and practice still arise. International human rights law does not regulate in detail how the rules on the inadmissibility of torture-tainted evidence should operate in practice, thus leaving several open questions. Due to the non-derogatory nature of the prohibition of torture and ill-treatment and the serious human rights repercussions of those acts if left unaddressed, the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) and the Ludwig Boltzmann Institute of Fundamental and Human Rights (LBI-GMR) organized a series of online discussions among international experts and civil society organizations to bring forward discussions on the matter. The online discussions consisted of two main complementary activities: an online discussion in writing on the Atlas of Torture Exchange Platform and an online workshop. The online discussion on the Atlas of Torture Exchange Platform took place between 21 and 25 February 2022. In this framework, national and international experts were invited to contribute to the exchange by submitting short written contributions on the exclusionary rule. ODIHR and LBI-GMR collected 12 contributions covering different perspectives (international organizations, lawyers, civil society organizations) and regions (including national inputs from EU and OSCE countries). An online workshop, which took place on 13 May 2022, offered the opportunity for further exchange. The workshop brought together different stakeholders and enabled a lively discussion on the most 1 ECtHR, ‘Guide on Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights: Right to a fair trial (criminal limb)’ (August 2021) §§ 220ff. See also Art 8(3) ACHR; Art 7 ACHPR and ACmHPR, ‘Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Assistance in Africa’ (2003). 2 MC Decision No. 7/20 Prevention and Eradication of Torture, para. 8. 4