A/69/387 order or upon admission to prison, as required in the Body of Principles and expanded upon in the Istanbul Protocol. 19 He also observed that records of medical examinations upon arrest or transfer are often non-existent and recourse to forensic expertise is at the discretion of the police, prison guard, prosecutor or judge and is usually denied. Private forensic examinations are simp ly unavailable to most detainees for lack of resources or because competent private expertise is non-existent in the community. In addition, modern forensic tests that could corroborate the victims’ reports and secure evidence are almost never available. Fear of reprisals against themselves or their families often leads victims of torture to deny or hide this reality. It is therefore important to address the disadvantage in which torture victims find themselves, in the light of the traumatizing experience of torture and the isolation experienced in police custody or prison settings. 33. When medical examinations are legally permitted by investigators, prosecutors or penitentiary authorities, these authorities have ample opportunity to delay action so that any injuries have healed by the time such an examination is conducted. During country visits the Special Rapporteur observed that the practice of judges or prosecutors promptly ordering a medical examination on their own initiative or in response to indications of abuse is rare. 34. On many occasions, torture may result in the death of the victim. The Special Rapporteur observed that in autopsy reports forensic doctors often only refer to the cause of death. The application of the Istanbul and Minnesota Prot ocols when performing forensic autopsies would contribute to proper documentation and detection of torture and other ill-treatment. He encourages the use of the Istanbul and Minnesota Protocols and the adoption of medico -legal documentation as routine practice in all circumstances where the events indicate torture or other ill-treatment. 35. As observed by the Special Rapporteur, unaccountability is often the result of there being available only very basic levels of expertise in forensic services, and sometimes their non-existence, which means that medical examinations, if carried out at all, are conducted by poorly trained doctors or nurses. In general, there is a shortage of qualified forensic experts regarding torture or other ill-treatment. In some countries, the education and specialization of forensic professionals includes training in the examination of alleged torture victims, but if the violations are widespread, these experts cannot adequately address the needs. 36. During country visits, the Special Rapporteur has reviewed samples of medical certificates by State health experts and forensic assessments and found the majority of those reviewed of very poor quality and accuracy, not performed in accordance with the minimum international standards for clinical forensic assessment of victims, and unacceptable as forensic evidence. The Special Rapporteur emphasizes that the description and documentation is important, not only the initial medical examination itself. Thus, the interpretation of the initial findings can be done by a more qualified expert as long as an appropriate medical examination has been conducted. Examinations made under less than optimal adherence to standards should still be considered in evidence, as long as they are conducted in good faith and under conditions of independence, and are impartial and thorough. 37. In many jurisdictions, the forensic services are closely linked with law enforcement agencies and criminal forensic investigations are undertaken in -house __________________ 19 10/23 See A/HRC/22/53/Add.2, para. 34. 14-61535