Page 116 - ประมวลสรุปความรู้เกี่ยวกับพิธีสารอิสตันบูลและพิธีสารมินนิโซตา

ISTANBUL PROTOCOL IV. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR INTERVIEWS

forensic expert. Forensic expert witnesses are key medico-legal evaluations. When possible, clinicians
target trainees regarding the Istanbul Protocol and conducting clinical evaluations should have knowledge
its Principles and their clinical evaluations should of prison conditions and torture methods used in the
be consistent with these standards. In each legal region in which torture and ill-treatment were alleged.
case, all government forensic expert witnesses and
non-governmental forensic and clinical expert 308. Many clinicians including primary care physicians,
witnesses should be prepared to demonstrate their psychiatrists, psychologists, clinical social workers
qualifications as experts on documenting torture and nurses may acquire the knowledge and skills to
and ill-treatment. Judges should not presume diagnose psychiatric conditions. Some physicians may
that official certification is sufficient to qualify a be able to document both physical and psychological
government forensic expert to conduct an evaluation evidence of torture or ill-treatment. Clinicians who
in accordance with the Istanbul Protocol. are not formally trained in psychiatry and/or
psychology may acquire knowledge and skills
306. The Special Rapporteur on torture has recognized to identify psychological evidence of torture and
the practice of prosecutors and judges excluding non- ill-treatment, such as symptoms of depression,
State experts from judicial proceedings, stating that: PTSD and anxiety through training or experience.

Courts should neither rule out non-State experts 2. Integration of physical and psychological
nor award State expert testimony more weight evaluations
based solely on their “official” status. Regarding
required expertise, it must be determined on 309. Medico-legal evaluations of alleged torture or
its merits. In that regard, independence and ill-treatment may require the expertise of more than
objectivity are a primary concern. The State will one clinician, including experts in physical and
usually have more resources and be in a privileged psychological evidence, as well as subspecialists in
position to examine victims. Those facts must be medicine, surgery and neuropsychology. In legal cases,
considered alongside the degree of independence it is important to integrate the findings of multiple
and impartiality such experts enjoy, as well as evaluations into one comprehensive evaluation
the obstacles that non-State experts might face when possible. It may be advisable for the experts
in gaining access to and procuring evidence. in physical evidence and psychological evidence to
The presumption must be that the State has to conduct one evaluation together. When conducted
account for its own action or inaction and its separately, clinical evaluations should set out, for
inability to protect the rights of persons under the clear understanding of legal professionals, that
its effective control. It is the State’s obligation such evaluations represent components of a single
to rebut allegations, and to show that it has clinical evaluation and be considered accordingly.
conducted truly effective investigations. 405 If there are separate clinical evaluations and there is
strong supporting evidence in one evaluation and only
307. The most important clinical qualification in conducting moderate supporting evidence in the other, the totality
an evaluation of an alleged victim is knowledge of how of evidence should be considered strongly supportive.
to apply the Istanbul Protocol and its Principles. If
clinicians are asked to list their clinical qualifications 3. Interview settings
in judicial proceedings, they may consider listing
additional information such as: (a) clinical education 310. Clinical evaluations of persons alleging torture or
and training; (b) psychological/psychiatric training; ill-treatment should be conducted at a location that
(c) experience in documenting evidence of torture the clinician and interviewee deem most suitable. This
and ill-treatment and other forms of violence; (d) is of particular concern in detention settings. In many
completion of relevant training courses and seminars, situations, it is not possible to control the environment
including those specific to the Istanbul Protocol; (e) of the interview, for example in prisons, and the
supervision and mentoring by experienced clinicians; interviewer and interviewee will have to make the best
(f) association with a human rights organization or of less than ideal conditions. Such shortcomings should
network or a treatment centre for torture survivors; be clearly documented in the report and requests
and (g) regional human rights expertise relevant to should be made to the relevant authority to provide

405 A/69/387, para. 53.

76