Kasey McCall-Smith
- Published in print:
- 2020
- Published Online:
- September 2021
- ISBN:
- 9781526134158
- eISBN:
- 9781526161000
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Manchester University Press
- DOI:
- 10.7765/9781526134165.00023
- Subject:
- Law, Public International Law
This chapter delivers an account of the way in which the engagement between States and the United Nations human rights treaty bodies plays a clear, but often overlooked, role in shaping customary ...
More
This chapter delivers an account of the way in which the engagement between States and the United Nations human rights treaty bodies plays a clear, but often overlooked, role in shaping customary international law. It proceeds from the accepted notion that international organisations contribute to international law-making in a number of ways. It argues that the responses by States to human rights treaty body interpretations support a conclusion that treaty bodies can, and do, contribute to the development of customary international law through their relationships with States parties. As a starting point, this chapter delivers an account of the treaty bodies as primary interpreters of human rights treaties and contributors to the development of human rights law followed by consideration of the prohibition against torture as a human right that is also recognised as a customary rule of international law. While it is clear that the core prohibition against torture is undoubtedly recognised in customary international law, the analysis demonstrates that further dimensions of the prohibition reflecting treaty body interpretations are on the horizon.Less
This chapter delivers an account of the way in which the engagement between States and the United Nations human rights treaty bodies plays a clear, but often overlooked, role in shaping customary international law. It proceeds from the accepted notion that international organisations contribute to international law-making in a number of ways. It argues that the responses by States to human rights treaty body interpretations support a conclusion that treaty bodies can, and do, contribute to the development of customary international law through their relationships with States parties. As a starting point, this chapter delivers an account of the treaty bodies as primary interpreters of human rights treaties and contributors to the development of human rights law followed by consideration of the prohibition against torture as a human right that is also recognised as a customary rule of international law. While it is clear that the core prohibition against torture is undoubtedly recognised in customary international law, the analysis demonstrates that further dimensions of the prohibition reflecting treaty body interpretations are on the horizon.
Rebecca Gordon
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- April 2014
- ISBN:
- 9780199336432
- eISBN:
- 9780199373291
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199336432.003.0002
- Subject:
- Religion, Religion and Society
Institutionalized state torture is defined as “the intentional infliction of severe mental or physical suffering by an official or agent of a political entity, which results in dismantling the ...
More
Institutionalized state torture is defined as “the intentional infliction of severe mental or physical suffering by an official or agent of a political entity, which results in dismantling the victim’s sensory, psychological, and social worlds, with the purpose of establishing or maintaining that entity’s power.” The legal definition of torture covers the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Treatment, and relevant U.S. federal law. Memos from the George W. Bush administration (e.g., by John Yoo, Jay Bybee, and Donald Rumsfeld) demonstrate efforts to prevent possible prosecution for actions undertaken in the “war on terror.” A phenomenological treatment, drawing on the work of Elaine Scarry, shows how torture destroys its victims’ sensory, psychological, and social worlds. Finally, a political description of torture demonstrates that, rather than providing accurate “actionable intelligence,” institutionalized torture’s political purpose is the destruction of organized resistance to the power of the torturing entity.Less
Institutionalized state torture is defined as “the intentional infliction of severe mental or physical suffering by an official or agent of a political entity, which results in dismantling the victim’s sensory, psychological, and social worlds, with the purpose of establishing or maintaining that entity’s power.” The legal definition of torture covers the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Treatment, and relevant U.S. federal law. Memos from the George W. Bush administration (e.g., by John Yoo, Jay Bybee, and Donald Rumsfeld) demonstrate efforts to prevent possible prosecution for actions undertaken in the “war on terror.” A phenomenological treatment, drawing on the work of Elaine Scarry, shows how torture destroys its victims’ sensory, psychological, and social worlds. Finally, a political description of torture demonstrates that, rather than providing accurate “actionable intelligence,” institutionalized torture’s political purpose is the destruction of organized resistance to the power of the torturing entity.
