Article 3 – Prohibit Torture/Inhumane Degrading Treatment (IDT)
Discuss Preliminaries
1. Is your client a victim (ss 7(1) and 7(7) HRA 1998, Art.34 ECHR and Klass v Germany)?
2. Was the alleged violation committed by a PA (ss 6(1) or 6(3)(b) HRA 1998 and Aston Cantlow)?
3. Is the action within the one year time limit (ss 7(5)(a) and (b) HRA 1998)?
4. Does the court have jurisdiction to hear the claim (Art.1 ECHR)?
Consider the substantive issues: How many potential violations are there? Deal with them
separately
Art 3: No one shall be subject to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment’
THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE RIGHT
Structure for limited rights where there is no (fictional) statutory provision – unlikely to be
anything covering these in a (fictional) statutory provision
STEP 1: Is the Article engaged and, if so, how is it engaged on the facts?
- Will be engaged where there is any torture or IDT
- State the facts – what happened to X? For each claim consider whether it constituted torture or IDT?
Compare it to case law
What is torture?
- Ireland v UK: Court defined ‘torture’ as treatment of a ‘particular intensity and cruelty …
intense physical and mental suffering’. In relevant cases the sex, age and health of the victim
will be taken into account
- Askoy v Turkey: Stripped naked, strung up with his arms tied together behind his back causing
paralysis, while he was hanging & blindfolded, electrodes were attached to his genitals, water was
thrown over him and he was beaten at 2½ hour intervals for four days = torture
- Aydin v Turkey: Raped, beaten, stripped and sprayed with high pressure water while in custody =
torture
What is IDT?
- Ireland v UK: Court defined ‘degrading’ as treatment capable of arousing ‘feelings of fear,
anguish and inferiority, capable of humiliating and debasing’ an individual. On the facts, they
found that there had been IDT – not torture; case involved terrorist suspects in the custody of British
security forces in Northern Ireland; While detained, they were subjected to the ‘five techniques’
wall-standing (being made to stand inches from a wall for anything up to 20 hours with limbs
outstretched), sleep deprivation, subjection to intense noise, hooding, and withholding of food to
make them reveal information and to make them more compliant in their future dealings with the
security forces (i.e., to become informers)
- Pretty v UK: The court referred to ‘degrading treatment’ as something which tends to break an
individual’s moral and physical resistance i.e. you should also consider the consequences of such
treatment.
- Napier v The Scottish Ministers: Poor conditions in cell (lack of toilet facilities – had to clear away
his own urine/faeces, poor lighting, lack of ventilation, small cell size) exacerbated skin problem
(eczema on applicants face) = IDT
Discuss Preliminaries
1. Is your client a victim (ss 7(1) and 7(7) HRA 1998, Art.34 ECHR and Klass v Germany)?
2. Was the alleged violation committed by a PA (ss 6(1) or 6(3)(b) HRA 1998 and Aston Cantlow)?
3. Is the action within the one year time limit (ss 7(5)(a) and (b) HRA 1998)?
4. Does the court have jurisdiction to hear the claim (Art.1 ECHR)?
Consider the substantive issues: How many potential violations are there? Deal with them
separately
Art 3: No one shall be subject to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment’
THIS IS AN ABSOLUTE RIGHT
Structure for limited rights where there is no (fictional) statutory provision – unlikely to be
anything covering these in a (fictional) statutory provision
STEP 1: Is the Article engaged and, if so, how is it engaged on the facts?
- Will be engaged where there is any torture or IDT
- State the facts – what happened to X? For each claim consider whether it constituted torture or IDT?
Compare it to case law
What is torture?
- Ireland v UK: Court defined ‘torture’ as treatment of a ‘particular intensity and cruelty …
intense physical and mental suffering’. In relevant cases the sex, age and health of the victim
will be taken into account
- Askoy v Turkey: Stripped naked, strung up with his arms tied together behind his back causing
paralysis, while he was hanging & blindfolded, electrodes were attached to his genitals, water was
thrown over him and he was beaten at 2½ hour intervals for four days = torture
- Aydin v Turkey: Raped, beaten, stripped and sprayed with high pressure water while in custody =
torture
What is IDT?
- Ireland v UK: Court defined ‘degrading’ as treatment capable of arousing ‘feelings of fear,
anguish and inferiority, capable of humiliating and debasing’ an individual. On the facts, they
found that there had been IDT – not torture; case involved terrorist suspects in the custody of British
security forces in Northern Ireland; While detained, they were subjected to the ‘five techniques’
wall-standing (being made to stand inches from a wall for anything up to 20 hours with limbs
outstretched), sleep deprivation, subjection to intense noise, hooding, and withholding of food to
make them reveal information and to make them more compliant in their future dealings with the
security forces (i.e., to become informers)
- Pretty v UK: The court referred to ‘degrading treatment’ as something which tends to break an
individual’s moral and physical resistance i.e. you should also consider the consequences of such
treatment.
- Napier v The Scottish Ministers: Poor conditions in cell (lack of toilet facilities – had to clear away
his own urine/faeces, poor lighting, lack of ventilation, small cell size) exacerbated skin problem
(eczema on applicants face) = IDT
