The Working Group on the Fight Against Torture presents the results of 2023 Index on Torture measurement in seven countries of the OSCE region: Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russia, and Ukraine. This is the fifth anniversary measurement. We present summary data that shows the dynamics of both improvement of the situation and its deterioration.
| Armenia | Belarus | Kazakhstan | Kyrgyzstan | Moldova | Russia | Ukraine | |
| 2019 | 93.77 | -94.2 | -3.04 | 9.45 | 121.26 | 0.81 | 107.83 |
| 2020 | 104 | -70.1 | 27.25 | 23.08 | 122.21 | -27.97 | 161.1 |
| 2021 | 84.08 | -92.8 | 107.17 | 31.42 | 161.5 | -26.64 | 145.57 |
| 2022 | 111.57 | -95.02 | 120.44 | 34.75 | 144.49 | 21.58 | 121.02 |
| 2023 | 131.53 | -93.83 | 132.51 | 80.36 | 128.91 | 21.61 | 92.02 |
In 2023, the Prohibition of Torture Index value increased significantly in Kyrgyzstan. The change was mainly due to improved indicators regarding the criminal prohibition of torture and procedural guarantees. The Index continued to rise in Kazakhstan. The main increase compared to the previous year was due to the criminalization of ill-treatment in the country’s Criminal Code.
The Index value in Russia, which showed positive dynamics in 2022 due to the criminalization of torture as an offense in the Criminal Code, has remained almost unchanged. This fact reinforces the argument made by Russian experts last year that prevention and suppression of torture cannot be achieved solely by introducing sanctions in the Criminal Code. Rather, it should be accompanied by effective measures to register reports alleging torture, conduct high-quality investigations of such incidents, and ensure that all perpetrators are brought to justice. In addition, it is essential to have effective torture prevention instruments in place, including procedural guarantees that work flawlessly in practice, ensuring the safety and accessibility of evidence of torture during investigations, and adequate civic oversight. No positive progress was made in any of these areas in Russia in 2023. Experts have not observed any changes in terms of reducing the practice of torture or improving the quality of investigation of torture cases.
Slight declines in the Index value have occurred in Moldova and Ukraine. In Ukraine, it was due to the lack of publicly available information on the number of complaints alleging torture, observed for the first time since 2019, which is an understandable consequence of the ongoing war. Nevertheless, it is important to note that even under these emergency conditions, Ukraine has been working to improve the quality of judicial statistics. Ukrainian experts assessed this indicator to be higher in 2023 compared to the previous year. In the 2023 Index for Moldova, a decline was observed in indicators such as access to information on the number of torture complaints and to judicial statistics, along with a lower assessment of the effectiveness of video surveillance in places of detention.
Belarus and Russia continue to demonstrate the worst performance.
Five years of monitoring the implementation of the prohibition of torture in the countries where the Index is measured clearly illustrate the main areas where positive or negative dynamics impact the final score. It is already possible to identify the key indicators that influence the Index value for each country. In the diagrams below, the total Index is highlighted in bold.
Indicators reflecting the performance of the State’s torture response mechanism played the key role in the dynamics of the Prohibition of Torture Index in Armenia. In 2023, in addition to these indicators, an improvement was also observed in the situation with judicial statistics.
The dynamics of the Prohibition of Torture Index in Belarus were primarily influenced by the refinement of the Index parameters following the pilot measurement in 2019, and subsequently by the 2021 decline in indicators reflecting the criminalization of torture in domestic legislation in Belarus and the impact of video surveillance in places of detention on torture prevention. Over the past two years, the Index has remained almost invariably low in Belarus.
The consistent increase in the Index value in Kazakhstan is attributable to torture response measures taken by the State, ensuring video surveillance in places of detention, and specifying the domestic provisions which criminalize torture.
In Kyrgyzstan, the increase in the Index value over the five years can be attributed to improvements in video surveillance in places of detention and procedural guarantees.
In Moldova, the Prohibition of Torture Index reached its peak in 2021, largely due to improvements in indicators reflecting the performance of the State’s torture response mechanism and enhanced effectiveness of video surveillance in preventing torture. Unfortunately, the performance of the State’s torture response mechanism later began to decline, contributing to the decline in the country’s total Index.
The dynamics of the Index indicators in Russia are quite illustrative. Clearly, the only indicator that has undergone significant changes in the country over the last five years is the one reflecting the criminalization of torture. This sole indicator influenced the Index curve, with no significant changes observed in other parameters during this period, as noted below.
The peak of the Index in Ukraine occurred in 2020, with experts attributing the increase primarily to the refinement of several indicators following the pilot measurement in 2019, as was the case with Moldova. The curve of the Index shows a drop in 2022 and 2023 due to weaker performance of the State’s torture response mechanism, which was caused by the war. It is important to note that all other indicators of the Index have consistently remained high.
The Prohibition of Torture Index, developed by the Working Group in 2020, serves as a unique tool to assess the level of countries’ compliance with the prohibition of torture. The first pilot measurement of the Index was conducted in eight countries of the OSCE region using their 2019 data. The Index was then calculated for each country based on measurements reflecting the State’s performance in areas such as torture response mechanism, judicial review, statutory prohibition of torture in domestic legislation, procedural guarantees designed to prevent the use of torture, torture prevention instruments in place, and whether the State has fully ratified and implemented the international standards on the prohibition of torture.
Following the pilot measurement, the Working Group held a series of consultations to review the Index parameters in an effort to adopt a more comprehensive approach to assessing the situation in each country. As a result, a number of methodological adjustments were made, e.g. certain indicators were added or refined, and the criteria were balanced to reflect both the regulatory framework and the law enforcement practice. Furthermore, a new section was added to the Index, assessing the effectiveness of torture investigations based on surveys of relevant experts, such as lawyers, prosecutors, judges, criminal investigators, and human rights defenders.