When assessing the human rights situation in the country, it must be kept in mind that the United States' occupation and the ensuing civil war and internal division, coupled with the current regional turmoil, are all circumstances that cannot be overlooked. It must be reminded, however, that these circumstances, cannot be used to justify grave human rights violations, as sometimes inferred in Iraq's initial report to the CAT submitted with a two-year delay on 30 June 2014. Iraq's national report will be considered during the interactive dialogue that will take place between the authorities and the CAT's 10 independent experts during the CAT's 55th session on 29 and 30 July 2015.

Lack of a definition of torture allows for "discretionary interpretation"

In its report, Alkarama started by denouncing the absence, in the Iraqi legislation, of a definition of torture compliant with Article 1 UNCAT, a disposition that creates a legal vacuum leaving it to the judges to arbitrarily decide what constitutes torture or not, therefore making the eradication of this practice difficult.

According to the Iraqi authorities, the reason behind the absence of a definition of torture is to "allow leeway for discretionary juristic interpretation without restricting the concept of torture to a specific definition which, with the passage of time and increasingly sophisticated methods of investigation and interrogation, might not be sufficiently all-embracing and exclusive."

To Inès Osman, Legal Coordinator and Regional Legal Officer for the Mashreq at Alkarama, "such an interpretation of the absence of a definition of torture is merely a legal migration of the 'enhanced interrogation techniques' used by the Bush administration during the occupation of Iraq," and "cannot in any way be compatible with the Convention against Torture," to which Iraq became a party on 7 July 2011.

Pervasive impunity for perpetrators of torture

Judges can not only decide arbitrarily of what constitutes torture, but also of when to open an investigation into allegations of torture, which they almost never do, in breach of Article 12 UNCAT and when, in rare cases, an inquiry is conducted, the acts of torture are often covered up, such as in the case of Amir Al Batawi, a 40-year old father and member of former Vice President, Al Hashimi's personnel, who died under torture in Baghdad on 15 March 2012. Although a committee was established, following a request by the Ministry of Human Rights, to investigate the circumstances of his death, the committee totally ignored the visible signs of torture to which the victim had been subjected to – including numerous wounds and burn marks on his body, and a cut-off tongue –, and concluded that Al Batawi had "died from a renal deficiency."

In the absence of investigations, perpetrators of torture are a fortiori rarely prosecuted, leading to a violation of Article 7 UNCAT. Moreover, public officials can only be referred to justice upon authorisation of the relevant Minister, such as the Ministry of Interior in a case involving the police. As for the sanctions provided for perpetrators, they're inappropriate and do not take into account the grave nature of torture, since they only provide for an undetermined term of imprisonment. The official brought to justice can also invoke an order from a superior which he "felt he was obliged to obey" as a justification of torture.

On the issue of impunity, Alkarama also expressed concern over the immunity from prosecution enjoyed by the Coalition Forces who invaded the country in 2003 and committed acts of torture against Iraqis, most notoriously in Abu Ghraib. Consequently, victims of torture at the hands of the Coalition forces have never obtained any form of redress or compensation. The very fact that the Iraqi authorities signed agreements with Coalition and U.S. forces – according to which the latter enjoy immunity from prosecution – amounts to several violations of the Convention against Torture, according to which State parties must respectively establish jurisdiction over all acts of torture committed under their territory (Article 5), open investigations (Article 12), as well as ensure that victims have the right to complain (Article 13) and obtain redress and compensation (article 14).

Systematic extraction of confessions under torture at the stage of "investigation"

In its report, Alkarama found that torture mostly occurs during the investigative stage, post-arrest and before charges are formally formulated by the judge. After the arrest, which is usually carried out without a warrant and sometimes directly upon orders from the Prime Minister's Office, suspects are transferred to police facilities under the control of the Ministry of Interior – known as "tasfiraat" –, where they are tortured in order to extract confessions. They are then brought for the first time before the investigative judge and subjected to barely veiled threats from the security officers should they reject their statements made under duress.

Often denied access to the outside world, family or legal counsel, most arrestees remains in a situation of incommunicado detention in unacknowledged prisons for long periods which are designed to extract confessions. A notorious secret detention centre where torture is systematically practiced is located in the old Al Muthanna military airport in West Baghdad, which is run by the 54th and 56th Brigade of the Army, which report directly to the Prime Minister's Office. After the facility was exposed in 2010, former Prime Minister Al Maliki affirmed in a televised interview that there were "no secret prisons in Iraq" and that the torture allegations were "lies" and a "smear campaign" launched by members of rival political factions who had instructed the prisoners to give themselves scars by "rubbing matches on some of their body parts."

Exclusive reliance on confessions under torture by a judiciary lacking independence

This alarming pattern of extraction of confessions, coupled with the lack of independence of the judiciary, perpetuates an abusive system of reliance on confessions under torture during investigative hearings and trials, in blatant violation of Article 15 UNCAT. After unfair trials, Iraqi courts systematically proceed to convict the accused and sentence him to long periods of imprisonment or the death penalty, which is provided for under the Anti-Terrorism Law.

When in some rare cases, proof of torture is brought to the attention of the judge, the defendant is still sentenced, only to life imprisonment rather than the death penalty. In its national report, Iraq actually recognised that confessions carry "considerable weight" and "significantly influence" the judicial body before which it is made. Alkarama denounced the fact that such a heavy reliance on confessions also in turn encourages the police and intelligence forces to use torture instead of carrying out proper forensic investigations that would allow meeting the standard of proof necessary for conviction.

In addition, the executive branch, in particular the Office of the Prime Minister, exercises powerful influence over the judiciary, to the extent that courts are often pressured to issue heavily guilty verdicts, including the capital punishment, on the basis of confessions under torture, especially against outspoken political opponents and critics of the government's policies. The prosecution of former Vice-President Tariq Al Hashimi on the basis of confessions under torture from his bodyguards broadcasted on national television in 2011 is emblematic. At the time, an Interior Ministry official, Major General Adel Daham commenting on such a practice affirmed that: "If we say we caught the leader of Al Qaeda, who will believe it? This is to show credibility. We are sure we are doing the right thing."

In fact, this practice of airing "confessions" on State-controlled channel Al Iraquiya with the collaboration of the Ministry of Interior is widespread. In the series "Terror in the hands of justice," pre-trial detainees are brought in to "confess their crimes," most likely after they have been subjected to torture and threats. As a result, the persons brought on TV are stigmatised as "terrorists" and the judiciary is pressured to issue heavy guilty verdicts on the sole basis of these public confessions. Likewise, officials of the Ministry of Interior regularly organise press conferences during which detainees are presented to the media to confess their crimes and even releases video footages of "interrogation" of pre-trial detainees on the Internet via their Youtube channel, in clear violation of the principle of presumption of innocence.

Alkarama calls upon Iraq to put a definitive end to the practice of torture

The issues mentioned above are just a few of the many concerns Alkarama shared with regards to the practice of torture in Iraq – for more, read Alkarama's shadow report – but must, at the same time, be address as a matter of priority as to put an end to the practice of torture in Iraq.

If the authorities are really willing to put a definitive end to this practice, as it had manifested its intention when it accessed the UN Convention against Torture four years ago, it should, among others:
• Define and criminalise torture;
• Investigate all acts of torture and ensure that those responsible for abuses are held to account;
• Forbid the use of confessions under torture and review all cases of convictions based on such confessions;
• Provide accountability and redress for the victims.

Addressing these essential conditions so as to ensure the rule of law is essential to restoring the people's trust in the country's institutions. The general climate of impunity that prevails among security forces and State-sponsored militias has contributed to create a sense of injustice and alienation in the population that is being exploited by extremist groups today to fuel terrorism. In light of the deteriorating security situation in the country, the Iraqi authorities would do better to respect the international commitments they made when accessing the Convention against Torture in July 2010 and remember that considerations of national security can never justify departure from the absolute prohibition of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

Alkarama hopes that the concerns raised in its shadow report will be addressed constructively during the dialogue between the Committee against Torture and the representatives of the State Party – which will be held on 29 and 30 July and can be watch live on the Treaty Body webcast – in order to put an end to torture and other violations of human dignity.

For more information or an interview, please contact the media team at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. (Dir: +41 22 734 1008)