Citation

Petersen HD, Rasmussen OV. Forensic Sci. Int. 1992; 53(1): 97-116.

Affiliation

Danish Medical Group, Amnesty International, Copenhagen.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1992, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

1568685

Abstract

Today, torture is used in more than 90 countries. In most of these countries, the authorities try to conceal the use of torture. Therefore torture methods which do not leave marks are more often selected. Consequently, appraisal of statements of torture is mostly based on interviews with ex-prisoners. The statement of torture is compared with the description of symptoms in the period following imprisonment and with the result of the clinical examination, which is often normal. In the evaluation of the validity of a statement reservations often have to be made for minor disagreements between the single elements of the examination, for example because of impaired concentration during the examination and loss of consciousness during the torture. Furthermore, the statement may be incomplete because of psychological inhibitions and imperfect interpretation. Assessment of allegations of medical involvement in torture is also based on information given by the ex-detainee. The presumed doctor's examination technique and the treatment carried out and prescribed by him, are compared with the context in which he acted. Only very rarely do torture victims have marks from e.g. injections or suturing which can be related to medical treatment in torture centres. The critical evaluation of data collected during in-depth interviews with torture victims is the core of documentation of torture and medical involvement in torture. The national medical associations share the responsibility of ensuring that their country's doctors comply with the ethical rules and do not in any way participate in or omit to report torture.

Language: en