TORTURE, INHUMAN AND DEGRADING TREATMENT According to Article 1 of the Convention against Torture, the prohibition of torture is characterised by four constitutive criteria: the intensity or gravity of the act, the intention, the purpose and the perpetrator. The gravity of the act must be analysed in the light of numerous elements - including the effects of the treatment or the duration or the vulnerability of the victim - and takes into account dimensions broader than the legal dimension, such as cultural and religious dimensions. As the criterion of gravity is subjective and vague in nature, it is impossible to establish a list of acts constituting torture that meet the gravity threshold. Depending on the assessment of the gravity criterion for the victim, some acts may amount to torture. Torture is the result of suffering inflicted voluntarily, but negligence will not be considered torture. Torture must be committed by an agent of the state, an individual acting under its responsibility, or with the same powers. The main difference between torture and illtreatment lies in the criteria of the degree of suffering and the intention to commit the act. Unlike torture, ill-treatment does not have to have a purpose or to have the same degree of intensity. Inhuman treatment must reach a minimum level of severity and cause physical harm or severe mental suffering. In several judgments, the ECtHR precised that “the Convention should, by means of this distinction [between torture and ill-treatment], attach a special stigma to deliberate inhuman treatment causing very serious and cruel suffering” qualifies as torture.30 As opposed to physical or mental suffering, “degrading treatment” implies humiliation or degradation, and the intent need not be mandatory. The ECtHR stated that: “Ill-treatment must attain a minimum level of severity if it is to fall within the scope of Article 3. The assessment of this minimum is relative; it depends on all the circumstances of the case, such as the duration of the treatment, its physical and mental effects and, in some cases, the sex, age and state of health of the victim.”31 In its judgment Khlaifia and Others v. Italy, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) recalled the elements to be taken into account when analysing if a case has met the gravity threshold: the purpose for which the ill-treatment was inflicted, together with the intention or motivation behind it ; the context in which the ill-treatment was inflicted; whether the victim is in a vulnerable situation, which is normally the case for persons deprived of their liberty.32 The following section presents distinct forms of abuse which were routinely observed throughout our research, and includes the use of excessive and disproportionate force, the use of electric discharge weapons, the denial of medical care after detainees have been subjected to violence, psychological abuse including torment and humiliation, and finally verbal aggression. Whilst this list is by no means exhaustive, it attempts to provide an overview of the incidents that were consistently reported in our testimonies. The Use of Punitive Violence According to our research physical violence with intent - perpetrated by Greek authorities in PRDCs - is routinely practised, particularly as a form of alleged punishment for perceived ‘bad behaviour’. Through our testimonies, ‘bad behaviour’ can be understood to mean merely complaining or protesting the conditions and treatment of detainees, fighting with other detainees, as well as other arbitrary actions such as making ‘too much noise’. Even respondents who did not experience violence themselves witnessed and described this tactic, which they explained was an effective tool to silence any complaints or reporting on the matter. This practice has been extensively reported on in the past, particularly following hunger strikes, for example in Paranesti PRDC.33 Ultimately, our testimonies indicate that any form of speaking out against inhuman treatment to detention authorities is often met with excessive violence in order to exert further control over detainees. This was most frequently and explicitly reported from Corinth, Amygdaleza and Paranesti PRDCs, as well as in police stations. Respondent 8, Morocco. Detained in Amygdaleza PRDC. OK, they beat him [Greek prison guards], they took him to the toilet first, and then they beaten him up with the stick, with their stick-They beaten him so bad in order for him to not ask again for his rights and to be scared of them. 9