he World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), alongside over 200 local groups in the SOS-Torture Network, created the Global Torture Index—a unique, data-driven tool designed to annually assess the risk of torture and ill-treatment in every country. The Index is launched within the OMCT Global Week Against Torture on the 25 June 2025, measuring 26 countries initially, covering the five regions, with plans for scaling up in subsequent years.   A thorough analysis based on comprehensive cross-cutting data becomes crucial for comparisons within and between countries and regions, as well as to identify trends, monitor human rights violations and achievements within the anti-torture movement over time.

What does the Global Torture Index measure?

The Index evaluates national legal systems, public policies, and their real-world effects, measuring them against international human rights standards. It aims to inform governments, international organisations, and the public through an interactive and accessible online platform. The Index not only quantifies risk but also provides qualitative insights gathered from local civil society organisations and human rights defenders—highlighting systemic issues of this global underreported problem, emerging trends, and testimonies from survivors. With its comprehensive analysis, it identifies concerning country practices, underlying causes, and priority areas for advocacy. By highlighting both challenges and examples of positive change, the Index serves as a platform to support evidence-based action and foster greater compliance with human rights standards.

The Torture Index captures the multi-faceted concept of torture and ill-treatment on the following 7 dimensions:

1. Political commitment against torture: Evaluation of the State's legal obligations, treaty ratifications, and implementation of basic anti-torture commitments and public policies in line with the UN Convention Against Torture and international and regional frameworks at the national level.
2. Ending police brutality and institutional violence: Assessment of safeguards and mechanisms to prevent torture and other ill-treatment in the context of law enforcement operations and during arrest, police custody, and interrogation, as well as during public assemblies and border control. Related institutional human rights violations such as death penalty, life sentence and enforced disappearances are also measured.
3. Freedom from torture while deprived of liberty: Evaluation of safeguards in detention facilities, ensuring decent conditions, legal protections, and humane treatment, with attention to specific groups, as well oversight mechanisms for accountability and monitoring,
4. Ending impunity: Examination of mechanisms to ensure accountability for torture and other ill-treatment, including investigative and judicial mechanisms, effective remedies for victims and trained forensic services.
5. Victims’ rights: Analysis of the State's responsibility to provide holistic redress to torture victims, along with comprehensive rehabilitation, protection measures, and specialised services.
6. Protection for all: Assessment of the State's positive obligations to ensure the enjoyment of human rights and the right not to be subjected to torture and other ill-treatment for specific groups and individuals facing a higher risk—such as children, women, LGBTIQ+ individuals, and ethnic minorities—and the implementation of effective legal and institutional measures against violations by state and non-state actors, including in national security context.
7. Right to defend and civic space: Evaluation of the legal framework, institutional practices and risks faced by human rights defenders and civil society organisations due to their human rights work, focusing on the ability to monitor human rights, operate freely and document abuses without restrictions.

For a deeper understanding of the content within these dimensions, we encourage you to consult our detailed Content and Summary of the Seven Thematic Pillars document.

How are Risks Measured?

Drawing on internationally recognised instruments—including the UN Convention against Torture (CAT) and its General Comments, the Optional Protocol to CAT (OPCAT), the Mandela Rules, and other key international and regional standards—the Index uses the OHCHR guide on human rights indicators as its main methodological reference. Risks are measured through a detailed questionnaire designed to collect information about compliance with international standards, their implementation, their impact on rights holders, and includes the following types of indicators:

• Structural- reflecting the legal and policy framework of a country in line with human rights international treaties, instruments, and standards.
• Process- measuring the State’s efforts to implement human rights commitments by public policies, regulations, programs, budgets, protocols, among others.
• Outcome- capturing the actual and/or perceived enjoyment of human rights by groups and reflects the impacts of the two indicators above.

Based on a comprehensive analysis of key indicators, each country is assigned a score ranging from 0 to 100. The country and thematic pillars' score are categorised into five distinct risk levels, indicating the risk of torture and ill-treatment, as follows:

• Very High Risk: Characterised by systematic violations of the absolute prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment, with very weak safeguards to prevent and protect from instances of torture and ill-treatment.

• High Risk: Marked by serious shortcomings in upholding human rights and implementing anti-torture safeguards, suggesting significant challenges.

• Considerable Risk: While there may be a legal and institutional framework in place, gaps in enforcement and protection measures indicate ongoing problems in preventing and erradicating torture and other ill-treatment.

• Moderate Risk: Demonstrates progress toward aligning with international human rights standards, however implementation remains inconsistent.

• Low Risk: Reflects a strong adherence to international human rights and anti-torture standards, with effective mechanisms in place to prevent and protect individuals from torture and other ill-treatment.

To learn more about the international standards the Index is based on and its methodology, please see our Index Anti-Torture Articles and detailed Methodology Note.

What Countries Are Covered By the Index?

In 2025, the Global Torture Index covers 26 countries across five global regions, including Africa, Americas, Europe and Central Asia, Asia and MENA, with the intention to add more countries as the Index scales-up. The countries included are: Argentina, Bahrain, Belarus, Cameroon, Colombia, Democratic Republic of the Congo, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Italy, Kyrgyzstan, Libya, Malaysia, Mexico, Moldova, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Russia, Spain, Togo, Tunisia, and Turkey.

Index implementing countries were chosen with attention to geographic diversity and the presence of pressing human rights issues, allowing the Index to reflect a broad global scope. Priority was given to countries where the OMCT has established members and working with longstanding civil society organisations, guaranteeing a solid local engagement and a substantial base of relevant data, analysis, and reports, providing a strong foundation for evidence-based monitoring and advocacy. Lastly, we have selected countries that have undergone a review by the Committee Against Torture (CAT) in recent years or during the Index implementation year, aligning the information with international human rights mechanisms.   

By gradually expanding its global reach, the Index maintains high standards of accuracy and reliability while adapting to diverse national contexts and global challenges. If your country is not yet represented, we appreciate your understanding as we work toward broader coverage in future rounds.

How Do We Collect Data?

The Global Torture Index employs a member-driven and local-data collection methodology, to ensure this tool reflects the realities on the ground and is rooted in the expertise of those closest to the rights holders. The SOS-Torture Network partners have an incomparable legitimacy to contribute to the Index analysis and for the inaugural 2025 edition, the OMCT Secretariat selected over 80 partners from 26 countries. These partners, supported by OMCT, filled in questionnaires using their own data, expert analysis and input from other local NGOs, victims, lawyers, and researchers. Tailored data collection methods were adapted to each national context, with validation meetings organised to reflect consensus and accuracy where multiple organisations were involved.

Feedback with implementing members and partners enabled continuous learning, the identification and sharing of good practices, and the methodology refinement. Given the sensitivity of torture monitoring, a risk assessment framework was integrated in the Index implementation to comply with the do-no-harm principle, prioritising safety even when it may limit public disclosure.

Who can Use the Index analysis and What for?

Human rights indices have had significant impacts on human rights advocacy: by clearly quantifying a pressing issue and making it visible, indices create momentum for change. Through a comprehensive picture of how countries are progressing or regressing in torture and ill-treatment, on a country and regional basis, the Global Torture Index provides valuable insights into State’s compliance with international human rights commitments, identifying implementation gaps, recognising good practices and sharing survivors’ stories.

Governments, United Nations bodies and international organisations can use this tool as a source for policymaking and measuring the effectiveness of their legal frameworks and public policies. Activists, Human Rights Defenders and Civil Society Organisations can leverage this tool to highlight their government's performance and advocate higher compliance with human rights standards. Journalists and Media professionals can find the index analysis relevant for adding context to their reporting and unveiling concerning practices. Additionally, the index serves as a one-stop and reliable source for the public, legal professionals, academics, development agencies and private sector companies, allowing to engage in informed human rights discussions and comprehend the hidden dimension of torture and ill-treatment.

Which Data Accessibility Challenges the Index faces and How to Overcome these?

Throughout the process of developing and testing the Index methodology, we have confirmed the existence of challenges in accessing information on torture and ill-treatment across all 26 measured countries. In many countries, opacity surrounds crucial data such as deaths in custody, excessive use of force, number of torture cases and sanctions against law enforcement officials. The Index serves as a tool for identifying data gaps by highlighting the (un)availability of information across specific countries, both in the absence of a specific legislation and in the lack of availability, in practice, of data regarding number of cases of torture and investigations, protocols used by law enforcement, type of weapons used, oversight mechanisms in public offices, among others.

To this end, the Torture Index features a Transparency and Access to Information Indicator, published for each country, which assesses the overall openness of public information. It captures obstacles such as government-imposed restrictions, the availability of relevant data, and the ability of civil society to access and use that information. Country scores for this indicator are classified into five categories (ranging from the worst to the best scenario): Suppressive, Concealed, Circumscribed, Accessible, and Transparent. In parallel, the Index scoring methodology penalises data lack of accessibility at the indicator level to reflect the State’s absence of transparency.

It is important to highlight that during the first three years, the Index methodology is adjusting and evolving by integrating a regular learning and review process to identify possible gaps and/or areas of improvement. This process is being done with the expertise and support of the Index Steering Committee, OMCT staff, members and partners, anti-torture experts and the academia.

Global Torture Index Steering Committee’s Crucial Contribution

The Steering Committee of the Global Torture Index plays a central advisory role in guiding the development and implementation of the Index. Comprising of 8 human rights and anti-torture experts from across the five regions, the Committee ensures transparency, strategic oversight, and regional representation in the Index’s design and evolution. Its responsibilities include reviewing and refining the methodology, addressing discrepancies in country scoring, participating in high-level strategic discussions, and serving as regional ambassadors to promote the Index. The Committee meets regularly to review progress, shape advocacy strategies, and explore opportunities for collaboration and fundraising with Index partners.

• Alexandru Postica, Promo Lex (Moldova)
• Ángel María Salvador Ferrer, Committee Co-chair, Documenta (México)
• Ghislain Koffi Nyaku, CACIT (Togo)
• Henri Tiphagne, People’s Watch-HRDA India (India)
• Ilef Kassab (Previously Hélène Legeay in 2024), OMCT Tunisia (Tunisia)
• Sònia Olivella, Irídia (Spain)
• Uju Agomoh, Committee Chair, PRAWA (Nigeria)
• Veronica Hinestroza, Advisor on International Human Rights Law, Associate Expert, Omega Research Foundation
  (Latin America)

Acknowledgements

The OMCT Global Torture Index team would like to thank all those who have contributed their time, expertise, and support. We also extend our sincere gratitude to the Executive Committee and Bureau, and staff of the OMCT Secretariat, whose leadership and dedication have been vital to guiding and shaping this project. Below, we acknowledge the individuals and institutions who have played an integral role in the Index success.

Institutional Contributors and Partners

• Bread for the World (donor)
• Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs FDFA (donor). “OMCT’s Global Torture Index is funded by Switzerland. Its contents are the sole responsibility of the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Switzerland.”
• OMCT SOS-Torture Network members and partners implementing the Global Torture Index
• La Fédération Internationale pour les Droits Humains (FIDH)
• Cooley LLP
  
• United Against Torture Consortium (UATC)
  
• École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), Essential Tech Centre
  
• Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights

Individual Advisors and Experts

• Steering Committee members
• Ravinder Bhavnani, Professor, International Relations/Political Science Faculty Associate, Centre for Finance and Development, Faculty Associate, Albert Hirschman Centre On Democracy. Geneva Graduate Institute.
• Nina Link, Ph.D.
• Miguel Martín Zumalacárregui
• Arzu Mammadova

Designers

• Global Torture Index Website Design and Development by Mud
• Eva Angelova

Disclaimer on Disputed Areas

Following United Nations practice, please note that the OMCT’s Global Torture Index map does not imply the expression of any opinion of the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The term “country”, as used in the Global Torture Index materials, refers, as appropriate, to territories or areas. The information gathered in the Torture Index does not reflect the realities of disputed areas currently affected by armed conflict.

Contact information

If you have any further questions on the Global Torture Index, we encourage you to explore the detailed methodology note, which may provide the additional insights you are looking for. However, if you still have questions or need further assistance, please do not hesitate to reach out to us directly at tortureindex@omct.org.