background, lawyers may request the following measures and remedies in cases of delays relating to the investigation of torture: Provisional measures: • Urging the court or human rights body concerned to adopt provisional measures. Regional human rights courts and international human rights treaty bodies may order such measures where there is a prima facie case and a risk that the applicant would suffer irreparable harm if no action is taken, which cannot be remedied by the payment of compensation or other measures at a later stage.129 Such provisional measures are mostly applied in relation to an imminent violation, such as refoulement in violation of the prohibition of torture130 or to seek protection against threats.131 It may also be argued that the lack of any effective investigations in the period between the application to the human rights body and the final decision cannot be remedied where crucial evidence is bound to be lost as a result of the delay. A human rights court or body may be open to such reasoning where there is credible evidence of a violation and where it can be demonstrated that the timely collection of particular evidence, such as medical reports, is essential to ensure the applicant’s right to an effective remedy. The provisional measure may thus consist of an order to preserve certain types of key evidence that may not be available at a later stage if no action was taken. Final Awards: • • • Pecuniary (material) damages for any costs incurred as a result of the delay in commencing or conducting an investigation (such as expenses incurred for collecting evidence that had not been collected by responsible authorities);132 Non-pecuniary (moral) damages for any pain and suffering resulting from delays, such as heightened anxiety and sense of injustice triggered by the conduct of responsible national authorities;133 Ordering the commencement of investigations and/or the carrying out of effective investigations and prosecutions, including by specifying that these steps should be taken without any (further) delays;134 providing the victims of violations with effective access to investigation procedures;135 129 See e.g. Article 63 (2) of the American Convention on Human Rights and Shamajev and others v. Georgia and Russia, para.473. 130 Ibid. 131 See e.g. Digna Ochoa and Placido et al. (Mexico), Provisional Measures. 132 The Inter-American Court of Human Rights has awarded pecuniary damages for denial of justice even where not pleaded as it assumed pecuniary damages, see Las Palmeras v Colombia (Reparations and Costs) para.53 (a) and Trujillo-Oroza v Bolivia (Reparations and Costs), para.74 (a) and (b) (forced disappearances case). The Human Rights Committee and the Committee against Torture do normally just hold that the state party concerned provide compensation, without differentiating between pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages and, in cases of a violation of Article 7 or provisions of the UN Convention against Torture, for what type of pecuniary harm the amount of compensation is awarded for. 133 It has been the consistent practice of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to award non-pecuniary damages for delays in cases of extrajudicial killings, disappearances and torture, see in particular 19 Tradesmen v Colombia, para. 250 (b); Gutierrez-Soler v Colombia, para.84 (a); Mapiripán Massacre v Colombia, para.284; Pueblo Bello Massacre v Colombia, para.256; Serrano-Cruz sisters v. El Salvador, paras.113 et seq.; Moiwana community v Suriname, para.94; Caracazo v Venezuela, para.66; Castro-Castro v Peru, para.432 (i) and Bulacio v Argentina, para.101. 134 See Tibi v Ecuador, para.258 and José Antonio Coronel et al. v. Colombia, para.10: “The Committee urges the State party to conclude without delay the investigations into the violation of articles 6 and 7 and to speed up the criminal proceedings against the perpetrators in the ordinary criminal courts.” 135 Tibi v. Ecuador, para.258. See also Aksoy v. Turkey, para.98 (as an obligation of the state party under Article 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights). 28