– ICCPR Article 2(3) of the ICCPR provides: “Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes: (b) To ensure that any person claiming such a remedy shall have his right thereto determined by competent judicial, administrative or legislative authorities, or by any other competent authority provided for by the legal system of the State, and to develop the possibilities of judicial remedy; 1 UN TREATY BODIES (a) To ensure that any person whose rights or freedoms as herein recognized are violated shall have an effective remedy, notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity; (c) To ensure that the competent authorities shall enforce such remedies when granted.” The HRC has repeatedly emphasised the importance of an effective remedy, and has indicated that States Parties should include in their reports information on how their legal system effectively guarantees the immediate termination of all the acts prohibited by Article 7 as well as appropriate redress.116 In Rodríguez v Uruguay, discussed above, the Committee reiterated that the right to redress could not include a right to demand the criminal prosecution of particular individuals. However, in order to ensure the applicant’s right to redress, the State Party should take effective measures “a) to carry out an official investigation into the author’s allegations of torture, in order to identify the persons responsible for torture and ill-treatment and to enable the author to seek civil redress; b) to grant appropriate compensation to Mr. Rodríguez; and c) to ensure that similar violations do not occur in the future.”117 Thus, like the CAT, the HRC considers that measures to guarantee the non-repetition of the violations form part of the duty to grant redress. 1.3 Scope of Application The HRC and the CAT have both generated a rich jurisprudence on the extent of State obligations related to the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment beyond the ‘traditional’ view of preventing the use of torture in interrogations. This section will provide an overview of this jurisprudence, identifying some of the main sources of violations of the absolute prohibition of torture and ill-treatment. 116 HRC, General Comment No. 20, 1992, §14. Rodríguez v Uruguay (1994), op. cit., §14. 117 29