Abstract
This article, firstly, looks at the origins of the ‘lawful sanctions' clause, which apparently narrows the scope of the CAT definition of torture, as well as at the debates related to its formulation. Then, it examines the dialogue between States and the Committee against Torture, established in the context of the State reporting procedure, in which reference to the ‘lawful sanctions' clause was sought with a view to determining the authentic interpretation that the Committee has held since the beginning of its operation. Finally, the question is posed whether this clause has kept any meaning after almost 20 years that the CAT has entered into force. Acknowledging the fact that the Committee tends to avoid reference to the ‘lawful sanctions' clause, and has not provided for any clear interpretation, the article further argues that the clause has no scope of application at all.