| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
  |
|
 |
|
  |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
International Efforts to Combat Torture and Inhuman Treatment: Have the New Mechanisms Improved Protection?
Roland Bank1
Full text available: PDF format *
I. Introduction
During the last decade, the United Nations and the Council of Europe have increased their efforts to combat torture and other forms of inhuman treatment through the introduction of special mechanisms. In 1985, the UN Commission on Human Rights appointed a Special Rapporteur on Torture to take account of and investigate reports of torture. With an eye to effectiveness, the conditions of appointment leave the Special Rapporteur unhindered by set procedures. In 1987, the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT) entered into force and was simultaneously backed up by the establishment of the Committee against Torture (CAT), a task force set up to oversee implementation of the Convention. In 1989, member states of the Council of Europe, acting through the European Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (ECPT), established the Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) and assigned it the task of visiting states parties and inspecting places of detention.2
Given that these organs have been in operation for at least seven, and as many as eleven years, the question arises as to whether they have led to increased protection for detainees and, if so, which among them have contributed more significantly to this end. In order to answer these questions, it will be necessary to (i) examine the legal and operational parameters within which (or in spite of which) the various agencies seek to achieve practical results; and (ii) compare the performance of the various agencies in those countries where each has been active. Examination of these issues will also take account of the activities of the already existing agencies, especially those working in relation to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). In this way, we may gain an idea of whether and, if so, to what extent to which the work of the various agencies overlap. This accomplished, the article will examine whether progress has been made through the activities of the new agencies (and which in particular), and conclusions will be drawn as to how improvements in the overall effectiveness of the agencies' work can be achieved.
* The free viewer (Acrobat Reader) for PDF file is
available at the
Adobe Systems.
1 Jean Monnet Fellow, European Forum, European University Institute.
This article is based on a research project conducted by the author at the
Max-Planck-Institute for foreign and international penal law in Freiburg. The
results of the project have been published under the title, Die
internationale Bekämpfung von Folter und unmenschlicher Behandlung auf den
Ebenen der Vereinten Nationen und des Europarates - Eine vergleichende Analyse
von Implementation und Effektivität der neueren Kontrollmechanismen
(1996).
2 Another regional convention entered into force in 1987 when the
Organization of American States enacted the Inter-American Convention to
Prevent and Punish Torture, with the aim of imposing substantive obligations on
member states very similar to those enshrined in the UNCAT. However, since the
American Convention neither makes provision for a specialized body to pursue
implementation nor introduces any novel procedures, it will not be taken into
consideration in this article.
© 1990-2004 European Journal of International Law
All comments and suggestions should be sent to webmaster
This site is part
of the Academy of European Law online, a joint partnership of the Jean Monnet Center at NYU School of Law and the Academy of European
Law at the European University
Institute.
This file was last modified:
Tuesday, October 14, 2003 12:42PM