miliating and debasing him. Furthermore, the procedure had entailed risks to the applicant’s health, not least because of the failure to obtain a proper anamnesis beforehand. Although this had not been the intention, the measure was implemented in a way which had caused the applicant both physical pain and mental suffering. He had therefore been subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment contrary to Article 3. Discrimination The significance of protecting against discrimination in international human rights law cannot be over-emphasized. This principle would apply in relation to any discrimination in conditions of detention, as it does in all other matters. As has been stressed earlier in this manual, difference of treatment that cannot be justified is likely to amount to unlawful discrimination in such matters as evidence collection, interrogation techniques or conditions of detention. In the counter-terrorism context, priority must be given to principles of non-discrimination. It is also worth noting that severe forms of institutionalized racism can amount to inhuman and degrading treatment.382 Positive obligations States are required to put in place mechanisms to prevent torture, inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment. As part of this positive obligation, treatment amounting to torture or inhuman and degrading treatment must be prohibited by criminal law, and criminal laws must be implemented in such a way so as to ensure that the prohibition is effective. For example, there have been a number of cases concerning failure to protect children at risk of abuse.383 Also, the failure of the law to protect adequately against rape has been found to violate Article 3 ECHR.384 A similar duty can be found to attach to Article 7 ICCPR. The Human Rights Committee’s General Comment 20 emphasizes the obligation on states to proscribe Article 7 treatment by 382 Op. cit., note 264, ECtHR, Cyprus v. Turkey, paras. 302-311. The Court concluded that Article 3 ECHR had been breached because of the discriminatory living conditions of the Greek Cypriots maintained by Turkey in the North of Cyprus (isolation, restriction on freedom of movement, surveillance and little prospect of renewal or expansion of their community). 383 ECtHR, Z. and Others v. UK, Application no. 29392/95, 10 May 2001, para. 74 (“[…] in the present case […] the neglect and abuse suffered by the four applicant children reached the threshold of inhuman and degrading treatment […] This treatment was brought to the local authority’s attention, at the earliest in October 1987. It was under a statutory duty to protect the children and had a range of powers available to them, including the removal of the children from their home. These were, however, only taken into emergency care, at the insistence of the mother, on 30 April 1992. Over the intervening period of four and a half years, they had been subjected in their home to what the consultant child psychiatrist who examined them referred as horrific experiences […] The Criminal Injuries Compensation Board had also found that the children had been subject to appalling neglect over an extended period and suffered physical and psychological injury directly attributable to a crime of violence […] The Court acknowledges the difficult and sensitive decisions facing social services and the important countervailing principle of respecting and preserving family life. The present case, however, leaves no doubt as to the failure of the system to protect these applicant children from serious, long-term neglect and abuse”). 384 Op. cit., note 173, ECtHR, M.C. v. Bulgaria, para. 150 (“Positive obligations on the State are inherent in the right to effective respect for private life under Article 8; these obligations may involve the adoption of measures even in the sphere of the relations of individuals between themselves. While the choice of the means to secure compliance with Article 8 in the sphere of protection against acts of individuals is in principle within the State’s margin of appreciation, effective deterrence against grave acts such as rape, where fundamental values and essential aspects of private life are at stake, requires efficient criminal-law provisions. Children and other vulnerable individuals, in particular, are entitled to effective protection”). Countering Terrorism, Protecting Human Rights 135