:(..~CHPt'J ACHPR African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rigilts 1. The Complainant recognizing argues Human Rights our Collective Responsibility that the recognition that rape is an intentional the criteria of intent and purpose analysis of the perpetrator's discrimination and intimidation, behind an act of torture role in rather than to the UN Committee lido not involve a subjective objectively in light of the circumstances'<+ motives and must be determined .It also states that, international (particularly act of humiliation, plays an important sexual impulses's . She adds that according the natural result of the perpetrators' against Torture, of rape as a form of torture criminal tribunals have stated that it is difficult to imagine circumstances in conflict situations) in which a rape committed consent of, a state agent could be considered to have a purpose by, or at the instigation of, or with the other than to punish, coerce, discriminate or intimidate'>. 2. The Complainant intimidation, submits that in addition rape has other purposes, namely the degradation and the communityt« and discrimination 3. The Complainant explains women disproportionately, a prohibited purpose this has been recognized for the offence of torture. that these acts have certainly purposes, including interrogation, Accordingly, this case constitutes torture of obtaining information, and humiliation punishment and of the victim, her family based on sex or gender-". that where rape is targeted recognized discrimination. to the purposes involved because she is a woman, as a form of discrimination-" against causing severe pain and suffering punishment, considers reprisal, or affects , thus demonstrating It states that the UN Committee intimidation, the Committee at a woman Torture has for impermissible humiliation and that the sexual abuse committed gender by the police in [... ]11"19 . See Amnesty International, Rape and Sexual Violence: Human Rights Law and Standards in the International Criminal Court, March 2011, p. 39, available at: www.amnesty.org/ download/Documents/32000/ior530012011en.pdf (hereinafter «Amnesty International Report »). 14 UN Committee against Torture, General Comment No.2: Implementation of Article 2 by States Parties, CAT/C/GC/2/CRP.1/RevA, 23 November 2007, para. 9. 15 ICTY, Prosecutor v. Delalic, IT-96-21, Trial Chamber Judgment, 16 November 1998, para. 495. 16 IACtHR, Raquel Marti de Mejia v. Peru (1996), Case 10.970, Report No. 5/96, Decision of 1 March 1996. Ibid, section V(B)(2). See, for example, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Prosecutor v. Akayesu, ICTR-96-4-T, Trial Chamber Judgment, 2 September 1998, para. 687; ICTY, Prosecutor v. Furundzija, IT-95-17/1-T, Trial Chamber Judgment, 2 September 1998, para. 687. Akayesu, ICTR-96-4-T, Trial Chamber Judgment, 2 September 1998, para. 687; ICTY, Prosecutor v. Furundzija, IT-9517/1-T, Trial Chamber Judgment, 10 December 1998, para. 162; UN Committee against Torture, V.L. v. Switzerland, CAT/C/37/D/262/2005, 20 November 2006, para. 8.10. 172008 Report of the Special Rapporteur on Torture, para. 30. 18 CEDAW, General Recommendation No. 19, para. 6; see also, Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 16, The equal right of men and women to the enjoyment of all economic, social and cui (\'iJjgb~rt~ of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights), E/C. 12/2005/4,11 August 20 6:pai~El7/.H/4r .o(''o~ 19 UN Committee against Torture, V.L. v. Switzerland, CAT/C/37/D/262/2005, 20 November 200 ~ ra~8 ~~ \ 13 An Organ of the ~ The African Commission on Human ancn 31 Bijilo Annex Layout, Ko' .... -ople Nor 11'. Rig~~\ \).I ~ i5 (/)~ West Coa~~I!egio Gam'Na;-' Phone: (220) 23~ 4361 Fa\. ~2~4 Email: 1 05 ~i.l.U~ ~ r Q<t' tfJ au-banJul@afrlG:!If'%> hItPs:lac~. u.in~~~ICp.\~~ , I . 'It ~ ~ ~ It DiS~hct\·'1 OMME E1 ol:.'=' (,vV~~ '? ~..~.~f:"'-:;f' Page 12 on 32 ,...'