Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T06:40:30.426Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What does the Prohibition of “Torture or Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment” Mean? the Interpretation of the European Commission and Court of Human Rights

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2009

Louise Doswald-Beck
Get access

Extract

Article 3 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms states that:

“No-one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”.

Type
Articles
Information
Netherlands International Law Review , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , May 1978 , pp. 24 - 50
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. “No-one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In particular no-one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.”

2. Over 7000 applications have been dealt with by the Commission.

3. Article 27(2): “The Commission shall consider inadmissible any petition submitted under Article 25 which it considers incompatible with the provisions of the Present Convention, manifestly ill-founded, or an abuse of the right of petition”.

4. Arts. 28 and 31.

4a. January 18th 1978.

5. Yearbook on the European Convention of Human Rights vol. 13 p. 928.Google Scholar

6. Marckx v. Belgium no. 6833/74. European Commission of Human Rights Annual Review 1975 p. 27.Google Scholar

7. Decisions and Reports vol. I p. 54.Google Scholar

8. Collection of Decisions of the European Commission of Human Rights vol. 24 p. 20.Google Scholar

9. Report of the Commission p. 471.Google Scholar

10. Denmark v. Greece no. 3321/67; Norway v. Greece 3322/67; Sweden v. Greece 3323/67; Netherlands v. Greece 3344/67. Report of the Commission vol. II Part I.

11. Ibid. pp. 374–383.

12. Ibid. p. 423.

13. Rapport général Mai 1967 – Mars 1968 p. 19. Translation from French.

14. Ibid. p. 424–425.

15. Ibid. p. 394–402.

16. Yearbook vol. 13 p. 600.

17. Collection of Decisions of the European Commission of Human Rights vol. 44 p. 115.Google Scholar

18. Yearbook vol. 10 p. 382.

19. Collection of Decisions vol. 46 p. 112.Google Scholar

20. No. 5712/72 supra.

21. 1. “Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of a country for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others”.

22. See in particular Case no. 2306/64 v. Austria (Collection of Decisions vol. 21 p. 23). Art. 176 of the Austrian Civil Code states that a person convicted to a prison sentence of more than one year loses paternal rights, therefore the applicant could not have his child visit him nor correspond with him.

23. Report of the Commission vol. II p. 411.Google Scholar

24. Ibid. p. 423.

25. Yearbook vol. 14 p. 352.

26. See Report of the Commission adopted on 19 12 1972.Google Scholar

27. See n. 25 and 26.

28. Collection of Decisions vol. 12 p. 61.Google Scholar

29. Collection of Decisions vol. 36 p. 66.Google Scholar

30. Vampel v. Austria n. 8.

31. Yearbook vol. 13 p. 780.

32. Report of the Commission vol. II p. 1.Google Scholar

33. Collected Edition of the ‘Travaux Préparatoires’ vol. I p. 116–117.Google Scholar

34. The Greek Case Report of the Commission p. 417.Google Scholar

35. Yearbook vol. 14 p. 250.

36. Report of the Commission p. 14.Google Scholar

37. Report of the Commission p. 472.Google Scholar

38. Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights p. 60.Google Scholar

39. Report of the Commission p. 401.Google Scholar

40. P. 57 of the Court's judgment.

41. The Greek Case. Report of the Commission p. 414–5 and p. 421.Google Scholar

42. See pp. 409–445 of the Commission's Report.

43. Ibid. p. 399.

44. Ibid. pp. 449–450.

45. Ibid. pp. 451–2.

46. Supra

47. Yearbook vol. II p. 1020.

48. Ibid. p. 1028.

49. Report of the Commission p. 463.Google Scholar

50. Article 2(1) “Everyone's right to life shall be protected by law. No-one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided by law. (2) Deprivation of life shall not be regarded as inflicted in contravention of this Article when it results from the use of force which is no more than absolutely necessary:

(a) in defence of any person from unlawful violence;

(b) in order to effect a lawful arrest or to prevent the escape of a person lawfully detained;

(c) in action lawfully taken for the purpose of quelling a riot or insurrection”.

51. Supra n. 33.

52. Ibid.

53. Report of the Commission p. 495.Google Scholar

54. Article 2.2(c) of the Convention – see n. 50.

55. Report of the Commission p. 496.Google Scholar

56. Supra n. 47.

57. Collection of Decisions vol. 30 p. 56.Google Scholar

58. See also case no. 4065/69 v. Germany (detainee forced into an isolation cell) and no. 4149/69 (forced into a prison bus).

59. Report of the Commission p. 423.Google Scholar

60. Ibid. pp. 395–399 and 409–413.

61. p. 56 of the judgment.

62. See Ireland v. United Kingdom. Report of the Commission pp. 389–391.Google Scholar

63. Ibid. p. 496.

64. See n. 50.

65. Ibid. Article 2(1).

66. Report of the Commission p. 497.Google Scholar

67. Collection of Decisions vol. 46 p. 128.Google Scholar

68. Supra, text to n. 32.

69. Report of the Commission vol. II p. 1.Google Scholar

70. Report of the Commission p. 402.Google Scholar

71. Ibid.

72. Ibid.

73. The illustrative cases of T.2, T.8, T.15, T.9, T.14 and T.10.

74. Ireland v. United Kingdom. Report of the Commission p. 463.Google Scholar

75. Ibid.

76. P. 57 of the judgement.

77. Ibid.

78. Ibid. pp. 84–86.

79. Ibid. p. 91.

80. Ibid. p. 118.

81. Ibid. p. 119.

82. Ibid. p. 106.

83. Ibid.

84. P. 113.

85. The Greek case, report of the Commission p. 58–59.Google Scholar

86. Ibid. pp. 366–370.

87. Ibid. p. 364.

88. Ibid. p. 367.

89. Supra text to n. 32.

90. Ireland v. United Kingdom. Report of the Commission pp. 440–442.Google Scholar

91. See also T.7, ibid. pp. 449–451 and 463.

92. See n. 37.

93. Ibid.

94. Collection of Decisions, vol. 24 p. 20.Google Scholar

95. Supra text to n. 36.

96. Report of the Commission in the East African Asian cases pp. 84–87.Google Scholar

97. Ibid.

98. Judgment of the Court p. 57.Google Scholar

99. Report of the Commission vol. II p. 13.Google Scholar

100. Ibid.

101. Report of the Commission vol. II pp. 12–13.Google Scholar

102. Ireland v. United Kingdom. Report of the Commission p. 384.Google Scholar

103. Ibid. p. 385.

104. Ibid. p. 470.

105. Ibid. p. 460.

106. Ibid. pp. 461–2.

107. Ibid. pp. 464–468.

108. Supra p. 43.

109. Judgment of the Court p. 56.Google Scholar

110. Report of the Commission vol. II p. 414.Google Scholar

111. Ireland v. United Kingdom. Report of the Commission p. 406.Google Scholar

112. Ibid. p. 426.

113. Ibid. pp. 418–419.

114. Supra n. 47.

115. Supra n. 57.

116. Ireland v. United Kingdom. Report of the Commission pp. 428–9.Google Scholar

117. Ibid. pp. 430–433.

118. See the case of T.16, ibid. pp. 440–442.

119. Ibid. pp. 415–421.

120. Ibid. p. 417–418.

121. See n. 90.

122. Report of the Commission p. 449–450.Google Scholar

123. Ibid. pp. 451–452.

124. Ibid. p. 452.

125. Ibid.

126. Ibid. pp. 451–2.

127. Ibid. p. 426.

128. See for example, n. 21.

129. Supra text ton. 66.

130. Supra n. 50.