With reference to relevant case law and UN practice, discuss the absolute nature of
the ban on torture, taking into account the protection offered by different universal
and regional treaties.
Introduction: what is torture, and why the prohibition of torture was
implemented?
This essay will examine the absolute nature of freedom from torture right and its
issue in the 21st Century. Several conventions commonly define torture as any
physical or mental act that causes severe pain or suffering to a person to obtain
information or punish him. Also, Darius Rejali describes torture as “a weapon of war
used to instil terror and gather intelligence to weaken the enemy”. 1 Indeed, during
the Second World War, democratic and other similar countries resorted to torture for
counter-insurgency purposes, control of the population, and destroying the enemies.
In 1948, after the horrific war and its torture practices, the first-ever prohibition on
torture was introduced by the General Assembly of the United Nations in the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights.2 Since this introduction, the right unarguably
becomes absolute, meaning that it cannot be breached under any circumstances
and no matter how significant the public interest is. The freedom of torture right
prohibits any torture internationally and regionally, and it imposes the responsibility
of the States to protect people and humanly treat them. However, despite the
absolute mature of the prohibition on torture, the governments repeatedly try to
undermine it by justifying that the exceptions can be made regarding the threats to
national security or in terms of any heinous crime. More common becomes the
practice of transferring someone outside of the country to another country for them to
be a subject to torture.3 Torture also often represents part of routine law
enforcement, for example, in Mikheyev v Russia,4 where the police used torture to
obtain information from the suspect. These examples show that failure constantly
1
Darius Rejali, ‘Torture and Democracy’ (Princeton University Press, 2009)
2
Universal Declaration on Human Rights (adopted 10 December 1948, entered into
force 3 September 1953) UN General Assembly, 217 A (III), Article 5
< https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b3712c.html > accessed 6 May 2021
3
Al Nashiri v Poland no. 28761/11 ECtHR 2014
4
Mikheyev v Russia no.77617/01 ECtHR 2006
, persists in the country and jeopardises all developed international standards of the
prohibition on torture.
Protection of freedom from torture
International humanitarian law imposes a duty on the countries to protect their
civilians' lives, health, and safety and torture them is absolutely prohibited. The
prohibition on torture is fundamental to humanitarian law and is protected by a series
of international and regional legal mechanisms. General Assembly of the United
Nations implemented the first-ever prohibition against torture in Article 5 of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, post Second World War. 5 Article 5 is
written as follows: "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment." 6 Such wording of freedom from torture served
as a universal guide to other legal mechanisms developed within regions of the world
to protect human rights. Some of the legal mechanisms even specifically emphasise
that none of the provisions can be derogated from under any circumstances, even in
the time of war or possible threat to the nation's safety. In such a manner, Articles 7
and 10 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 7 and Article 5 of the
American Convention on Human Rights ensure protection from torture. 8
The most authoritative international treaty on the prohibition of torture is Convention
against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
(CAT).9 Article 1 of CAT defines torture in the very detailed way: “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
5
Universal Declaration on Human Rights, Article 5 (n 2)
6
Ibid
7
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (adopted 16 December 1966,
entered into force 23 March 1976) UNTS, vol. 999, p. 171, Article 7 and Article 10
< https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b3aa0.html > accessed 6 May 2021
8
American Convention on Human Rights, "Pact of San Jose", Costa Rica ( adopted
22 November 1969, entered into force 18 July 1978) OAS, Article 5
< https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b36510.html > accessed 6 May 2021
9
Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment ( adopted 10 December 1984, entered into force 26 June 1987) UN
General Assembly
< https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/cat.aspx > accessed 6 May
2021
the ban on torture, taking into account the protection offered by different universal
and regional treaties.
Introduction: what is torture, and why the prohibition of torture was
implemented?
This essay will examine the absolute nature of freedom from torture right and its
issue in the 21st Century. Several conventions commonly define torture as any
physical or mental act that causes severe pain or suffering to a person to obtain
information or punish him. Also, Darius Rejali describes torture as “a weapon of war
used to instil terror and gather intelligence to weaken the enemy”. 1 Indeed, during
the Second World War, democratic and other similar countries resorted to torture for
counter-insurgency purposes, control of the population, and destroying the enemies.
In 1948, after the horrific war and its torture practices, the first-ever prohibition on
torture was introduced by the General Assembly of the United Nations in the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights.2 Since this introduction, the right unarguably
becomes absolute, meaning that it cannot be breached under any circumstances
and no matter how significant the public interest is. The freedom of torture right
prohibits any torture internationally and regionally, and it imposes the responsibility
of the States to protect people and humanly treat them. However, despite the
absolute mature of the prohibition on torture, the governments repeatedly try to
undermine it by justifying that the exceptions can be made regarding the threats to
national security or in terms of any heinous crime. More common becomes the
practice of transferring someone outside of the country to another country for them to
be a subject to torture.3 Torture also often represents part of routine law
enforcement, for example, in Mikheyev v Russia,4 where the police used torture to
obtain information from the suspect. These examples show that failure constantly
1
Darius Rejali, ‘Torture and Democracy’ (Princeton University Press, 2009)
2
Universal Declaration on Human Rights (adopted 10 December 1948, entered into
force 3 September 1953) UN General Assembly, 217 A (III), Article 5
< https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b3712c.html > accessed 6 May 2021
3
Al Nashiri v Poland no. 28761/11 ECtHR 2014
4
Mikheyev v Russia no.77617/01 ECtHR 2006
, persists in the country and jeopardises all developed international standards of the
prohibition on torture.
Protection of freedom from torture
International humanitarian law imposes a duty on the countries to protect their
civilians' lives, health, and safety and torture them is absolutely prohibited. The
prohibition on torture is fundamental to humanitarian law and is protected by a series
of international and regional legal mechanisms. General Assembly of the United
Nations implemented the first-ever prohibition against torture in Article 5 of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, post Second World War. 5 Article 5 is
written as follows: "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment." 6 Such wording of freedom from torture served
as a universal guide to other legal mechanisms developed within regions of the world
to protect human rights. Some of the legal mechanisms even specifically emphasise
that none of the provisions can be derogated from under any circumstances, even in
the time of war or possible threat to the nation's safety. In such a manner, Articles 7
and 10 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 7 and Article 5 of the
American Convention on Human Rights ensure protection from torture. 8
The most authoritative international treaty on the prohibition of torture is Convention
against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
(CAT).9 Article 1 of CAT defines torture in the very detailed way: “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
5
Universal Declaration on Human Rights, Article 5 (n 2)
6
Ibid
7
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (adopted 16 December 1966,
entered into force 23 March 1976) UNTS, vol. 999, p. 171, Article 7 and Article 10
< https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b3aa0.html > accessed 6 May 2021
8
American Convention on Human Rights, "Pact of San Jose", Costa Rica ( adopted
22 November 1969, entered into force 18 July 1978) OAS, Article 5
< https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b36510.html > accessed 6 May 2021
9
Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment ( adopted 10 December 1984, entered into force 26 June 1987) UN
General Assembly
< https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/cat.aspx > accessed 6 May
2021
