– UNCAT Article 14 of the UNCAT provides: UN TREATY BODIES 1 “Each State Party shall ensure in its legal system that the victim of an act of torture obtains redress and has an enforceable right to fair and adequate compensation, including the means for as full rehabilitation as possible. In the event of the death of the victim as a result of an act of torture, his dependants shall be entitled to compensation.” The CAT considers that “the right to an effective remedy for a breach of the Convention underpins the entire Convention, for otherwise the protections afforded by the Convention would be rendered largely illusory.”112 In some cases, the Convention itself sets out a remedy for particular breaches, but where it does not, the Committee will interpret a substantive provision to contain within it a remedy for its breach.113 Thus, while Article 14 is not explicitly included in the list of articles applicable to other ill-treatment under Article 16, the Committee held in Dzemajl and Others v Yugoslavia that “The positive obligations that flow from the first sentence of article 16 of the Convention include an obligation to grant redress and compensate the victims of an act in breach of that provision.”114 The State is therefore obliged to provide redress and compensation to victims of all forms of prohibited ill-treatment. Moreover, in Urra Guridi v Spain, the Committee found that the pardoning of three Civil Guards who had been found guilty of torture breached not only Articles 2 and 4, but also Article 14, as the notion of compensation “should cover all the damages suffered by the victim, which includes, among other measures, restitution, compensation, and rehabilitation of the victim, as well as measures to guarantee the non-repetition of the violations, always bearing in mind the circumstances of each case.”115 Agiza v Sweden, CAT Communication No. 233/2003, 20 May 2005, §13.6. See, for example, Agiza v Sweden (2005), ibid, where the Committee found that the prohibition on refoulement in Article 3 of the UNCAT should be interpreted so as to include a remedy for its breach. 114 Dzemajl and Others v Yugoslavia (2002), op. cit., §9.6. This was confirmed in CAT General Comment No. 2, §3. The first sentence of Article 16 reads: “Each State Party shall undertake to prevent in any territory under its jurisdiction other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment which do not amount to torture as defined in article I, when such acts are committed by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.” 115 Urra Guridi v Spain (2005), op. cit., §6.8. 112 113 28