Méndez Principles: Shifting mindsets for effective interviewing

This is the first episode in a series exploring  the Mêndez Principles on Effective Interviewing: a new tool to help end coercive interviewing. 

The Méndez Principles are designed to support investigators collect reliable information – not a confession – using rapport-based interviewing techniques. They also uphold the rights of those being interviewed by ensuring that key safeguards are respected in practice. 

Our guest,  Wilder Tayler, has decades of experience in torture prevention. He’s worked for organisations like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the International Commission of Jurists. In Uruguay, he leads the National Preventive Mechanism, visiting places of detention all over the country and advocating for changes to address the risk factors that lead to torture and ill-treatment.

Naturally, he was one of the people asked to help draft the Méndez Principles.

Transcript

Méndez Principles: Shifting mindsets for effective interviewing 

Almudena Garcia

Hello and welcome to Perspectives, the APT’s podcast which explores contemporary issues related to torture prevention and dignity in detention. 

I’m Almudena Garcia, APT’s Digital Communication Associate, and this episode is the first in a series on the Méndez Principles on Effective Interviewing: a new tool to help end coercive interviewing.

The Méndez Principles were released in May 2021 and our Deputy Secretary General, Audrey Olivier Muralt, spoke with Wilder Tayler, Head of the National Preventive Mechanism of Uruguay, who helped draft the Principles.

Audrey Olivier Muralt

After four years of consultations and drafting – involving experts in policing, investigations, human rights, psychology and other disciplines – we now have the Méndez Principles. They are designed to support investigators collect reliable information – not a confession – using rapport-based interviewing techniques. They also uphold the rights of those being interviewed by ensuring that key safeguards are respected in practice. 

Our guest today – Wilder Tayler – has decades of experience in torture prevention. He’s worked for organisations like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the International Commission of Jurists. He was also a founding member of the UN Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture. In Uruguay, he leads the National Preventive Mechanism, visiting places of detention all over the country and advocating for changes to address the risk factors that lead to torture. 

Naturally, he was one of the people asked to help draft the Méndez Principles.

Wilder Tayler

I was invited by Professor Mendez himself and by Mark Thomson, the former Secretary General of the APT to join a drafting group. In my particular case, I focused on legal standards, and particularly on the issue of guarantees at the moment of detention and thereafter. What I did find very inspiring I will say, was that the group charged with reviewing the draft was truly multidisciplinary. These standard setting exercises tend to be dominated by lawyers. So I felt that it was a very good experience to find policemen and policewomen and individuals with police and police oversight experience, as well as neurological scientists, in the group. And in my opinion, it greatly benefited the final outcome. We ended up with a more diverse and adaptive text. And I think that's one of the big assets of the Méndez Principles.

Audrey Olivier Muralt

You’ve worn so many different hats during your career. You’ve been involved in so many torture prevention initiatives. What do you see as the added value of the Méndez Principles, both to prevent torture but also for law enforcement officials?

Wilder Tayler

Well, the value is, I would say, you have a multi-faceted value. The Principles codify new standards and also combine them with some very well-established international standards on prevention of torture. So it is a mix of norms, like the absolute prohibition with procedural safeguards, but they come together with more novel and innovative standards on information gathering, for example. These Principles tend to be quite proactive in terms of showing in a very elaborated manner, the way forward for an investigator, to say how they can find the information they are seeking. 

And then that presents a significant advantage over other standards and norms, that would not show the way ahead. For example, this has been a problem for prevention professionals in their daily work. I mean, we tend to confront police who say, "Well, that's okay. I kinda do that, but then how do I do it?" That's the question that you receive. And that's the answer you need to craft in your recommendations. So now, we have a way forward to show that is codified, that can be efficient or professional and mindful of human rights. So that's very important both for prevention professionals and for law enforcement officials. So you see, the six principles can go straight, or inspire, go straight into codes of conduct or standard operating procedures or directives of different types. So I think that's that's very, very important.

Then there is another thing that I do not want to overlook. It's only a few years ago, only a very few years ago that the world and the human rights movement, and particularly the West and the United States, we were confronted with a government-sponsored doctrine that embraced coercive interrogations as a reaction to the terrorist attacks of September 11. And there was that moment, that terrible moment I would say for human rights, in which the benefits of coercion were discussed openly in the media and policy-making and academic institutions. And while I would say that that line did lose quite a lot of credibility, my hope is that the Méndez Principles would put that debate to rest because it is such a good, coherent and well-articulated alternative formulation. A pro-human rights formulation. That is an enormous advantage here for all of us, and that's probably one that I rate very high.

Audrey Olivier Muralt

This is such a powerful point, Wilder. That we need to shift mindsets about the fact that coercion simply doesn’t work. It might extract a confession, it might extract what people want to hear, but it doesn’t get the truth. Now, as we’ve been sharing the Méndez Principles with different groups, one question we’ve been asked is whether these principles are applicable across different regions. For example, people see them mostly as applicable to police, to law enforcement, while in the Americas, your region, public prosecutors are often the one leading investigations. What's your take on that?

Wilder Tayler

Well, I actually would think that it's the wrong question that you had been asked. I mean, because the problem is the Principles are valid regardless of who is conducting the interview. What matters is that there is an interview in or an interrogation process underway. Now, whether it's a public prosecutor or a police officer, both may be looking the wrong way for a confession as their preferred option, regardless of whether that reflects the truth or not. So the truth is that confession-seeking practices are very well entrenched in law enforcement culture and others with the investigative mandates. So that frequently leads to coercion.

So the principles would apply to all situations, involving both prosecutors and other law enforcement officials. Let's not forget also that there other functions, such as intelligence gathering through interviews, or other law enforcement activities that, in some countries, in Latin America, are entrusted to the military, in the fight against drugs, for example. So in all these cases, the Principles will apply. 

So I think the question is not who is acting, the question is, what do you want to achieve? Let me put it this way. Do you want to obtain a confession at any cost or do you want to embark in a truth-seeking exercise that might be more complex, but would also be more professional and fair, and will eventually lead you to a set of information that you can trust? That's the question.

Audrey Olivier Muralt

Now, in addition to helping draft the Méndez Principles, you also lead the National Preventive Mechanism in Uruguay. This will be very important in their work, especially their engagement with the authorities there. What has been the reaction of your team members to the Principles?

Wilder Tayler

Well, I mean, you know, every new standard is always met with some curiosity and a certain degree of skepticism until they prove their usefulness. That's the reality, but this is not only about the Méndez Principles, this is about standard-setting everywhere, all the time. However, for the National Preventive Mechanism, being on the ground and having to interact on a daily basis with law enforcement officials, I think they have found it very helpful. I mean, the truth, they are finding them now very helpful.

As you know well because we have been conducting some training, the cooperation with you and the APT and other colleagues, I think we are really benefiting from that. How that happens? Well, in Uruguay, in my case, we do have a permanent operation here of visiting police stations. And, it's quite common that the complaints arise in the cells of a police station against the kind of treatment people have received. And then when you go out and start discussing that with the head of the police station, you can actually quote the Principles. Sometimes you'll quote the entire instrument, sometimes you just quote one Principle and say, "Look, I mean, we should understand that doesn't work. Screaming at those kids is not going to work. It's not going to work. You are not going to get what you want about that." And this is not just human rights problems, this is proven scientifically. And then you start talking about this kind of thing. Sometimes you'll get funny reactions but I can say the more professional the law enforcement official is, the more interested and curious they become. 

Audrey Olivier Muralt

You mentioned that sometimes, when something new comes along, there can be skepticism or reticence or distrust. What kind of challenges do you see with regards the implementation of the Méndez Principles?

Wilder Tayler

Well, the problem is implementation itself, it's always implementation. I think it’s a sort of paradox that the Principles being a very practical tool, because they’re extremely practical, they do bring some complexities with them. You know, the first thing is the natural complexity, they are new and then, again, you have to explain it. Second, I would say is this complexity of having a tool that is inspired in a multidisciplinary effort because that changes the language in which you say to them. And even law enforcement officials are much more used to the legal jargon than a more complex and varied and multi-faceted language.

And we should not forget one very important problem is that we work against torture and, against expression of brutality and force. And this is a phenomena that is present in many law enforcement agencies. So you do have sectors who will believe that the way forward is violence, and that the way forward is coercion, because they thought it was efficient, or because they were trained. In our countries, people who were trained during the military governments, and that also breeds there. So you need to give the debate with them. But we have to accept that there may be resistance as well, and there will not always be just good faith. I mean, there are just people who want to do it their own way.

Audrey Olivier Muralt

One of the other issues people have raised with us is a concern about the cost of implementation. They say, "Yeah, we’re very interested in these Principles but they're going to cost us money because you have to invest into training.” Is this something you’ve come across? And what would you say in response?

Wilder Tayler

Let's not forget that the budget is an easy way out for those who do not want to use new standards. And they'll say, "Well, you know, preventing torture is a very expensive thing". And you say, "Well, have you ever considered how expensive is this for your society to practice torture rather than prevent it?" And they don't have an answer for that. 

But we need to be proactive. We have a task there, to elaborate, to work with also budget specialists, to see how expensive this can really be compared to the money law enforcement agencies are spending on far less efficient methods. Because training exists. Investigations, they do exist because they happen all the time. Places for interrogation, they actually do. You do find it maybe even more expensive because they have to be secret and clandestine. So that's also important.

I think a good part of the cost will be offset by swapping a dedication of those funds. And then there's the other thing and it means, well, yes, it may cost money. I mean, protecting human rights and fighting crime, both things are costly. I mean, none of them is for free. But it is also the mission of the State to do both things, both things are in equal footing. So I think this is something we have to confront. And maybe in this period of the Méndez Principles, I think we should offer ways forward by showing, "Okay, this is what you spend when you budget for your classical techniques. This is what would cost you to train your people. Here's the seed money," And then challenge and say, "Why didn't you make an experiment? I mean, start using this in one department. Go to... I don't know. Serious crimes. Start there with those techniques and see what happens. Let's check whether it costs you any more or not." I think we have to receive the challenge and we have to put forward the challenge, because it's an easy challenge. So I think that our answer should be as scientifically based as the Principles are and I'm sure we will prevail. 

And can I add something more about the Principles that I do think is a unique feature. I do rate very, very high on these Principles that there is a section on vulnerabilities. That is something that you are not going to find in other human right standards. I mean, those have been grouped and there has been an effort to understand it as a phenomenon that is not just static but also dynamic, that understands that a reason for vulnerability may come up during interview. That being exhausted can render people vulnerable, that is not just a status. I think this is very important principle, to say, I was delighted when I saw that this issue was brought in because when you review the entire collection of human rights communication, you find standards, for example, on children, or on women, or those who suffer disabilities. But you don't find this in relation to a particular activity as such. This brings us to a next level and I hope it will also mark an example for further standard setting.

Almudena Garcia

Wilder Tayler is the Head of the National Preventive Mechanism of Uruguay. 

We hope you enjoyed this episode of Perspectives. We’ll be back soon with another episode in this series exploring the Méndez Principles.

And if you have an idea for us to cover on Perspectives, we’d love to hear from you. Contact us via email on apt@apt.ch. Or find us on social media – Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn. Thanks for listening and we look forward to your company next time.