SWAMI VIVEKANAND SUBHARTI UNIVERSITY

SARDAR
PATEL SUBHARTI
INSTITUTE OF LAW
PROTECTION
AGAINST TORTURE AND
DEGRADING
TREATMENT :
A STUDY OF AFGHANISTAN
2022-2023
INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW

SUBMITTED TO:- SUBMITTED BY:-

Ms. Afreen Almas Riya Yadav
(Assistant Professor) B.A.LL.B VIII Semester
Enrolment no. - 1905000000064

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Page 1
At the very outside, I would like to pay thanks to the almighty God. It gives me
immense pleasure to acknowledge and to say thanks to the ones who helped me
throughout the course of my work. I am thankful to our respected subject teacher
under whose learned and scholarly guidance the present work has been completed.
She helped us in the passive way. She gave moral support and guided me in
different matters regarding the topic. She has been very kind and patient while
suggesting me the outlines of project and correcting my doubts.
I express my sincere gratitude to Ms Afreen Almas, Assistant Professor for
granting permission of proper analysis of the project. I thank her for all the
support, her constructive suggestion have always been soothing and desired, hence
it’s my duty to express my gratitude for her constant support and encouragement.
I want to pay my sincere thanks to Dean, Faculty of law, all the teachers of
SARDAR PATEL SUBHARTI INSTITUTE OF LAW,SWAMI VIVEKANAND
SUBHARTI UNIVERSITY. I want to thank all my friends who helped in
completing my work. Last but not the least, my thanks to all who have helped me
directly in the completion of my work.

Riya Yadav
B.A.LL.B
VIII Semester

INDEX
Page 2
S.No. TOPIC PAGE NO.

1. Introduction 4-5
2. Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel,
Inhuman, or Degrading treatment or Punishment 6-7
3. Important Provision under UNCAT 8-9
4. Committee against Torture 10
5. UNCAT and India 11
6. Other Provisions related to Torture, Cruel, and
Degrading treatment 12
7. Human Rights Law in Afghanistan 13-14
8. Torturous, Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading
Treatment in Afghanistan 15-17
9. Conclusion 18-19
10. Bibliography 20

INTRODUCTION

Cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment (CIDT) is treatment of persons which is

contrary to human rights or dignity, but is not classified as torture. It is forbidden
Page 3
by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 3 of the European
Convention on Human Rights, the United Nations Convention against Torture and
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Although the distinction
between torture and CIDT is maintained from a legal point of view, medical and
psychological studies have found that it does not exist from the psychological point
of view, and people subjected to CIDT will experience the same consequences as
survivors of torture.
The general meaning of Torture is the action of causing somebody great pain either
as a punishment or to make him/her say or do something.
It means an act of causing great physical or mental pain in order to persuade
someone to do something or to give information, or to be cruel to a person.
Torture occurs when someone deliberately causes very serious and cruel suffering
(physical or mental) to another person. This might be to punish someone, or to
intimidate or obtain information from them.
Degrading treatment means treatment that is extremely humiliating and
undignified. Whether treatment reaches a level that can be defined as degrading
depends on a number of factors. These include the duration of the treatment, its
physical or mental effects and the sex, age, vulnerability and health of the
victim. This concept is based on the principle of dignity - the innate value of all
human beings.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission defines degrading treatment as
undignified and humiliating treatment. Whether treatment is considered degrading
is dependent on several factors, including the duration of the treatment; physical
and mental effects on the victim; and the victim's age, race, sex, and
vulnerabilities.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission defines inhuman treatment as:
 serious physical assault
 psychological interrogation
 cruel detention conditions or restraints
 physical or psychological abuse in a healthcare setting

 threatening to torture someone

Page 4
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in its Article 7
expressly prohibits the medical or scientific experimentation without free consent
of its subject(s) and recognizes it as a particular form of torture or cruel, inhuman
or degrading treatment. Moreover the Article 4.2 of the ICCPR expressly prohibits
derogation from this prohibition in its Article 7 and thus is directly establishing it
as Peremptory norm in this sense making the non-consensual medical or scientific
experimentation potentially punishable under the provisions of national penal
codes concerning the crimes of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment
in all countries which are parties of the ICCPR and the Convention against Torture
and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE AND OTHER CRUEL,

INHUMAN OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT

Page 5
The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment (the “Torture Convention”) was adopted by the General
Assembly of the United Nations on 10 December 1984. It was signed in New York.

 It entered into force on 26 june 1987 after receiving the required number of
ratifications i.e., 20.
 The objective of the convention is preventing torture and inhuman, cruel or
degrading punishments all over the world.
 The convention makes it obligatory for nations to prevent torture in all
territories under their jurisdictions.
 It also forbids the transfer of persons to other countries where they might be
tortured.
 Since the convention entered into force, the absolute prohibition against
torture and other acts of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or
punishment has become accepted as a principle of customary international
law.
The convention defines torture to include any act which may cause severe
suffering or pain to a person and is inflicted intentionally especially for obtaining
information from that person, or for getting a confession of any crime that he/she is
accused of having committed. This includes both physical and mental torture. 
Part I (Articles 1–16) contains a definition of torture (Article 1), and commits
parties to taking effective measures to prevent any act of torture in any territory
under their jurisdiction (Article 2). These include ensuring that torture is a criminal
offense under a party's municipal law (Article 4), establishing jurisdiction over acts
of torture committed by or against a party's nationals (Article 5), ensuring that
torture is an extraditable offense (Article 8), and establishing universal
jurisdiction to try cases of torture where an alleged torturer cannot be extradited
(Article 5). Parties must promptly investigate any allegation of torture (Articles 12
and 13), and victims of torture, or their dependents in case victims died as a result
of torture, must have an enforceable right to compensation (Article 14). Parties
must also ban the use of evidence produced by torture in their courts (Article 15),
and are barred from deporting, extraditing, or refouling people where there are
substantial grounds for believing they will be tortured (Article 3). Parties are
required to train and educate their public servants and private citizens involved in
the custody, interrogation, or treatment of any individual subjected to any form
of arrest, detention, or imprisonment, regarding the prohibition against torture
Page 6
(Article 10). Parties also must keep interrogation rules, instructions, methods, and
practices under systematic review regarding individuals who are under custody or
physical control in any territory under their jurisdiction, in order to prevent all acts
of torture (Article 11). Parties are also obliged to prevent all acts of cruel, inhuman,
or degrading treatment or punishment in any territory under their jurisdiction, and
to investigate any allegation of such treatment. (Article 16).
Part II (Articles 17–24) governs reporting and monitoring of the convention and
the steps taken by the parties to implement it. It establishes the Committee Against
Torture (Article 17), and empowers it to investigate allegations of systematic
torture (Article 20). It also establishes an optional dispute-resolution mechanism
between parties (Article 21) and allows parties to recognize the competence of the
committee to hear complaints from individuals about violations of the convention
by a party (Article 22).
Part III (Articles 25–33) governs ratification, entry into force, and amendment of
the convention. It also includes an optional arbitration mechanism for disputes
between parties (Article 30).
The Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel,
Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT), adopted by the
General Assembly on 18 December 2002 and in force since 22 June 2006, provides
for the establishment of "a system of regular visits undertaken by independent
international and national bodies to places where people are deprived of their
liberty, in order to prevent torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment
or punishment," to be overseen by a Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture and
Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
As of April 2022, the Protocol has 76 signatories and 91 parties.

IMPORTANT PROVISIONS UNDER UNCAT

Page 7
Article 1.1 of the Convention defines torture as:
For the purpose of this Convention, the term "torture" means any act by which
severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a
person for such purposes as obtaining from him, or a third person, information or
a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is
suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person,
or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering
is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of
a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include
pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions.
Ban on torture
Article 2 prohibits torture, and requires parties to take effective measures to
prevent it in any territory under their jurisdiction. This prohibition is absolute and
non-derogable. "No exceptional circumstances whatsoever" may be invoked to
justify torture, including war, threat of war, internal political instability, public
emergency, terrorist acts, violent crime, or any form of armed conflict. In other
words, torture cannot be justified as a means to protect public safety or prevent
emergencies. Subordinates who commit acts of torture cannot abstain themselves
from legal responsibility on the grounds that they were just following orders from
their superiors.
The prohibition on torture applies to anywhere under a party's effective jurisdiction
inside or outside of its borders, whether on board its ships or aircraft or in
its military occupations, military bases, peacekeeping operations, health care
industries, schools, day care centers, detention centers, embassies, or any other of
its areas, and protects all people under its effective control, regardless of
nationality or how that control is exercised.
The other articles of part I lay out specific obligations intended to implement this
absolute prohibition by preventing, investigating, and punishing acts of torture.
Ban on refoulement
Article 3 prohibits parties from returning, extraditing, or refouling any person to a
state “where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger
of being subjected to torture.” The Committee Against Torture has held that this
danger must be assessed not just for the initial receiving state, but also to states to
which the person may be subsequently expelled, returned or extradited.
Obligation to prosecute or extradite
Page 8
Article 7 obligates the government of the state in which the alleged offense
occurred to either prosecute the accused party, or extradite them to a state that will,
under the principle of aut dedere aut judicare.
Ban on cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment
Article 16 requires parties to prevent "other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment which do not amount to torture as defined in article 1" in
any territory under their jurisdiction. Because it is often difficult to distinguish
between cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment and torture, the
Committee regards Article 16's prohibition of such act as similarly absolute and
non-derogable.

COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE

Page 9
The Committee Against Torture (CAT) is a body of human rights experts that
monitors implementation of the convention by State parties. The committee is one
of eight UN-linked human rights treaty bodies. All state parties are obliged under
the convention to submit regular reports to the CAT on how rights are being
implemented. Upon ratifying the convention, states must submit a report within
one year, after which they are obliged to report every four years. The Committee
examines each report and addresses its concerns and recommendations to the State
party in the form of "concluding observations". Under certain circumstances, the
CAT may consider complaints or communications from individuals claiming that
their rights under the Convention have been violated.
The CAT usually meets in April/May and November each year in Geneva.
Members are elected to four-year terms by State parties and can be re-elected if
nominated.
In more summarized way the implementation of the convention by parties is
monitored by the Committee against Torture, which is a body of experts in human
rights.

 It is one of the eight United Nations-linked bodies for human rights treaties.

 All State parties to the UNCAT should regularly submit reports to the
Committee on how they are implementing rights.
 Once a country has ratified the convention, it should submit a report within a
year. After that, they are expected to submit a report once in four years.
 The Committee can also entertain complaints from individuals regarding a
violation of their rights under the convention.

UNCAT AND INDIA

Page 10
India has not ratified UNCAT, although it signed it in 1997.
 There are only a handful of nations that have not ratified the convention.
This includes China and Pakistan also.
 Despite the increasing number of cases of police brutality and violence, and
custodial deaths in India, the country is hesitant to ratify this treaty.
 The recent deaths of a father-son duo in Tamil Nadu under police custody
have sparked widespread outrage in the country, and this has also led to
renewed calls for India to ratify the convention. Read more about this
in CNA dated July 2, 2020.
 The Law Commission of India, in its 2017 report under the chairmanship of
Justice BS Chauhan, had stated that if India ratified the convention, it would
not face problems in extraditing criminals from foreign countries.
 This is because, under the convention, parties should not transfer
persons to countries where there is danger of torture.
 The commission has also recommended several steps to resolve the problem
of police brutality and violence by agents of the government, including
compensation for torture and also the death penalty for death by torture.

OTHER PROVISIONS RELATED TO TORTURE, CRUEL

AND
Page 11
 DEGRADING TREATMENT

Article 15 of Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disability states:

Freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment -  
1. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment
or punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his or her free
consent to medical or scientific experimentation.
2. States Parties shall take all effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other
measures to prevent persons with disabilities, on an equal basis with others, from
being subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Article 3 of Equality and Human Rights Commission states: Freedom from
torture and inhuman or degrading treatment. This article protects from:
 torture (mental or physical)
 inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and
 deportation or extradition (being sent to another country to face criminal
charges) if there is a real risk you will face torture or inhuman or degrading
treatment or punishment in the country concerned.
Article 5 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights states : No one shall be
subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Article 7 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states : No
one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his free consent to
medical or scientific experimentation.

HUMAN RIGHTS LAW IN AFGHANISTAN

Page 12
The Taliban are a predominantly Pashtun, Islamic fundamentalist group that
returned to power in Afghanistan in 2021 after waging a twenty-year insurgency. 
Following the U.S.-led invasion that toppled the original regime in 2001, the
Taliban regrouped across the border in Pakistan and began taking back territory
less than ten years after their ouster. By August 2021, the Taliban had swept back
into power. Their swift offensive came as the United States withdrew its remaining
troops from Afghanistan as outlined in a 2020 peace agreement with the group.
Human rights in Afghanistan have been violated by the Taliban administration
since the Taliban takeover of Kabul in August 2021. The government has
prevented most teenage girls from returning to secondary school education, and
blocked women in Afghanistan from working in most sectors outside of health and
education. Women have been ordered to wear face coverings in public, and barred
from traveling more than 70 kilometres (40 mi) without a close male relative. In
December 2022, the Taliban government also prohibited university education
and primary education for females in Afghanistan, sparking protests and
international condemnation.
The presidential government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, which
previously ruled Afghanistan, from 2004 until the Taliban overthrew it in 2021,
had a strong human rights framework in its constitution. A bill of rights was
enshrined in chapter two of the 2004 Constitution of Afghanistan. The right to
life and liberty were constitutionally protected, as were the right to a fair trial and
the presumption of innocence for all persons. That gave the Islamic Republic a
strong human rights framework that was guaranteed to all citizens.
In July 2022, Hibatullah Akhundzada, the Taliban's reclusive leader, lashed out at
the criticism and demands of the international community on the Taliban's human
rights restrictions, rejecting any negotiations or compromise on his "Islamic
system" of governance
The Taliban have imposed a harsh interpretation of Islamic law despite pledges to
respect the rights of women and religious and ethnic minority communities.
Meanwhile, as they have transitioned from an insurgent group to a functional
government, the Taliban have struggled to provide Afghans with adequate food
supplies and economic opportunities.
Afghans are now trapped in a human rights crisis that the world seemed powerless
to address. The severe rollback of the rights of women and girls, reprisals targeting
opponents and critics, and a clampdown on freedom of expression by the Taliban
amounted to a descent into authoritarianism.

Page 13
Afghanistan, speaking as a country concerned, said one year after the Taliban’s
military takeover, the story of broken promises was well-known, and the
seriousness of the situation well-established. Girls were still barred from secondary
schools. Women were deprived of safety, freedom and fulfilment. Minorities were
persecuted, subject to widespread and systematic attacks. Torture, ill-treatment,
mass punishment, arbitrary detentions and forced displacement continued to be
carried out.
The UN mission in Afghanistan has documented numerous human rights
violations. The Taliban have intimidated journalists and restricted press freedoms,
leading to the closures of more than two hundred news organizations. Their
government has violently cracked down on demonstrations, and protesters and
activists have been monitored and forcibly disappeared. They also reestablished
their Ministry for the Propagation of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, which under
their previous rule enforced prohibitions on behavior deemed un-Islamic. In
November 2022, they ordered judges to enforce their interpretation of sharia; in the
weeks after, authorities resumed public floggings and executions.
Women have seen their rights obliterated. The Taliban have prohibited most girls
from attending secondary school, banned all women from attending and teaching at
universities, and prevented women from working. In December 2022, the group
prohibited women from working at local and international nongovernmental
organizations (NGOs).
The UN Development Program (UNDP) has estimated that restricting women’s
employment could cost up to 5 percent of Afghanistan’s gross domestic product
(GDP). Amnesty International has reported a drastic increase in the number of
women arrested for violating discriminatory policies, such as rules requiring
women to only appear in public with a male chaperone and to completely cover
their bodies. The rates of child marriage have also increased. 

TORTUROUS, CRUEL, INHUMAN AND DEGRADING

TREATMENT IN AFGHANISTAN

Page 14
Following the emergence of the Taleban armed political group in late 1994 and
their military success against opposing factions, the application of these
punishments has appeared to increase. The strict interpretation of Islamic law
applied by the Taleban includes stoning for adultery, amputation for theft and
flogging for drinking alcohol or commiting minor sexual offences. Men accused of
sodomy have been crushed under a wall which had been toppled on them. All these
punishments have been inflicted in public in Taleban-controlled areas after
manifestly unfair trials.
In the climate of severe lawlessness that dominated much of Afghanistan after the
collapse of the Soviet backed government in April 1992, armed Mujahideen guards
some of whom were as young as 14years old acted as ‘judges’, punishing people
for anything they considered to be ‘un-Islamic’. The victims as recorded by
Amnesty International during this period included a woman who was stoned to
death in Sarobi (near Jalalabad) in May 1993. She was reportedly the wife of a
Hezb-e Islami commander who had disappeared for eight years and in whose
absence she had married another man. When the commander returned and found
his wife had remarried he ordered his men to stone her to death in public. In
another instance a man was hacked to death in March 1994 in Kabul’s Chel Sotoon
district for sending his 15-year-old girl to school while the same guards raped the
girl next to the dead body of her father.
With the military success of the Taleban, who are now said to control around 80
percent of Afghanistan, the nature of the civil war in Afghanistan has changed.
Compared to the lawlessness of the Mujahideen groups of the past, the Taleban
have appeared to bring a degree of order to areas of the country brought securely
under their control. However, they have sought to impose this order through the
imposition of cruel and inhuman punishments.Stating as their aim to impose on
Afghanistan their strict interpretation of Islamic law, the Taleban authorities have
been uncompromising in their response when confronted with the criticism that
such punishments violate international humanitarian law.
UNFAIR TRIALS:
Defendants in the Taleban courts which impose these cruel, inhuman punishments
do not receive a fair trial. Judges in these courts, many of whom are virtually
untrained in law and unaware of human rights safeguards, reportedly base their
judgements on a mixture of their personal understanding of Islamic law and a tribal
code of honour prevalent in the Pushtun areas. These courts often decide a dozen

Page 15
different cases in the same day in sessions which may only take a few minutes.
Defendants do not have the right to have a lawyer, the presumption of innocence is
dispensed with and verdicts are final. There is no mechanism for appropriate
judicial appeal.
So far, they do not appear to conform to the internationally recognized standards
set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which proclaim the right of
every person to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal.
These rights exist regardless of the identity or status of the judicial authority.
PRISON CONDITIONS:
Prison Conditions Prison conditions in Afghanistan have been appalling at all
times. Prisoners have been held, and continue to be held, in overcrowded detention
centres, deprived of adequate food, sleeping space and toilet facilities. Torture is
reported to be standard practice.
Prison conditions have not improved in areas controlled by the Taleban. In most
cases there has been no news about the whereabouts of the prisoners. It is feared
that many of them may be subjected to beatings or other cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment while in custody.
The biggest prison run by the Taleban authorities is reportedly in Kandahar where
the majority of political prisoners or military combatants are held. Prisoners are
reportedly made to do forced labour on the building of a new storey to the prison.
Some prisoners have reportedly died of exhaustion or from the beating by the
prison guards. Many prisoners reportedly have burns on their hands from active
lime. Food is reportedly inadequate - one piece of bread in the morning and one
piece at night - and prisoners who cannot afford to buy additional food face
starvation.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Amnesty International takes no position with respect to the cultural, political or
religious values which underlie judicial or legal systems. However, it opposes all
executions as they constitute the ultimate form of cruel, inhuman or degrading
punishment in violation of the most fundamental right of every human being: the
right to life.
It considers that judicial amputation as well as other forms of corporal punishment
and torture violate the most elementary standards of humane treatment. The
prohibition of mutilation, cruel treatment and torture is part of customary

Page 16
international law and is recognized in Common Article 3 of the Geneva
Conventions which is binding on all parties in Afghanistan.
The present courts in Afghanistan which impose cruel, inhuman punishments must
be considered to be arbitrarily constituted, and it is doubtful that in their present
form they can provide a fair trial. However, Amnesty International acknowledges
the need for a judicial mechanism to bring to justice those guilty of criminal
offences including perpetrators of human rights abuses. To that end it is urging all
armed groups in Afghanistan including the Taleban to seek assistance from the
United Nations in ensuring that any judicial processes they administer adhere to
internationally-recognized standards for fair trial.

Page 17
 CONCLUSION

The Taliban have broken multiple pledges to respect human rights and women’s

rights since taking over Afghanistan a year ago, Human Rights Watch said today.
After capturing Kabul on August 15, 2021, Taliban authorities have imposed
severe restrictions on women’s and girls’ rights, suppressed the media,
and arbitrarily detained, tortured, and summarily executed critics and perceived
opponents, among other abuses.
Taliban human rights abuses have brought widespread condemnation and
imperiled international efforts to address the country’s dire humanitarian situation,
Human Rights Watch said. The economy has collapsed, largely because
governments have cut foreign assistance and restricted international economic
transactions. More than 90 percent of Afghans have been food insecure for almost
a year, causing millions of children to suffer from acute malnutrition and
threatening serious long-term health problems.
Since taking power, the Taliban have imposed rules that comprehensively prevent
women and girls from exercising their most fundamental rights to expression,
movement, and education, and affect their other basic rights to life, livelihood,
health care, food, and water. They have prohibited women from traveling or going
to their workplace without a male family member accompanying them – an
impossible requirement for almost all families – and barred them from many jobs.
The Taliban have denied almost all girls access to secondary school.
The Taliban’s horrendous human rights record and their unwillingness to
meaningfully engage with international financial institutions have furthered their
isolation, Human Rights Watch said. Foreign governments should ease restrictions
on the country’s banking sector to facilitate legitimate economic activity and
humanitarian aid, but the Taliban also need to curtail rights abuses and hold those
responsible for abuses to account.
Many governments have denounced or criticized the Taliban’s decision to restrict
girls’ education, including the entire United Nations Security Council and almost
all members of the G7 and G20. No government has defended or sought to justify
the Taliban’s position.
Over the past year, Human Rights Watch has produced numerous media
releases and reports on Taliban human rights abuses, and recently issued
an updated question-and-answer document on Afghanistan’s overall humanitarian

Page 18
and economic crisis, and recommendations to mitigate it. These include support for
the US and the Taliban to negotiate an agreement allowing ordinary Afghans to
engage more effectively in legitimate commercial activity.
Acute hunger is pervasive across Afghanistan, even though food and basic supplies
are available in markets throughout the country, Human Rights Watch said. Almost
20 million people – half the population – are suffering either level-3 “crisis” or
level-4 “emergency” levels of food insecurity under the assessment system of
the World Food Programme (WFP). Over one million children under 5 – especially
at risk of dying when deprived of food – are suffering from prolonged acute
malnutrition. The WFP reported in June that tens of thousands of people in one
province, Ghor, had slipped into level-5 “catastrophic” acute food insecurity, a
precursor to famine.
Overall, Afghans have been suffering from some form of food insecurity since last
August, skipping meals or whole days of eating and engaging in extreme coping
mechanisms to pay for food, including sending children to work.
The impact of the economic crisis on women and girls is especially severe, as
women and girls have increasing difficulties accessing assistance and health care.
The humanitarian situation would be even worse had the UN and other aid
providers not substantially increased their operations in 2022, Human Rights
Watch said.

Page 19
 BIBLIOGRAOHY

To complete my project on the topic “Protection against Torture and Degrading

Treatment : A study of Afghanistan” I have taken help from various websites:
 https://www.hrw.org
 https://www.amnesty.org
 https://en.wikipedia.org
 https://www.cfr.org
 https://www.ohchr.org
 https://www.un.org
 https://www.equalityhumanrights.com
 https://byjus.com
 https://legal.un.org

Page 20