<p>I attempt to analyze South Africa&rsquo / s legal position pertaining to torture, in relation to the international legal framework. Since it has been established that torture and cruel inhuman and degrading treatment (CIDT) usually occur in situations where persons are deprived of personal liberty, I examine legislation, policies and practices applicable to specific places of detention, such as correctional centres, police custody, repatriation centers, mental health care facilities and child and youth care centers. I establish that although South Africa has ratified the UNCAT and is a signatory to the OPCAT, our legal system greatly lacks in structure and in mechanisms of enforcement, as far as the absolute prohibition and the prevention of torture and other forms of cruel and degrading treatment or punishment are concerned. I submit that South Africa has a special duty to eradicate torture, since many of its citizens and several of its political leaders are actually victims of torture, who suffered severe ill treatment under the apartheid regime. I argue that the South African legal system is sufficiently capable of adopting a zero-tolerance policy toward torture and to incorporate this with the general stance against crime. In many respects, South Africa is an example to other African countries and should strongly condemn all forms of human rights violations, especially torture, since acts of torture are often perpetrated by public officials who abuse their positions of authority. I conclude by making submissions and recommendations for law reform, in light of the obstacles encountered within a South African context.</p>

<p>I attempt to analyze South Africa&rsquo / s legal position pertaining to torture, in relation to the international legal framework. Since it has been established that torture and cruel inhuman and degrading treatment (CIDT) usually occur in situations where persons are deprived of personal liberty, I examine legislation, policies and practices applicable to specific places of detention, such as correctional centres, police custody, repatriation centers, mental health care facilities and child and youth care centers. I establish that although South Africa has ratified the UNCAT and is a signatory to the OPCAT, our legal system greatly lacks in structure and in mechanisms of enforcement, as far as the absolute prohibition and the prevention of torture and other forms of cruel and degrading treatment or punishment are concerned. I submit that South Africa has a special duty to eradicate torture, since many of its citizens and several of its political leaders are actually victims of torture, who suffered severe ill treatment under the apartheid regime. I argue that the South African legal system is sufficiently capable of adopting a zero-tolerance policy toward torture and to incorporate this with the general stance against crime. In many respects, South Africa is an example to other African countries and should strongly condemn all forms of human rights violations, especially torture, since acts of torture are often perpetrated by public officials who abuse their positions of authority. I conclude by making submissions and recommendations for law reform, in light of the obstacles encountered within a South African context.</p>

Magister Legum - LLM / I attempt to analyze South Africa's legal position pertaining to torture, in relation to the international legal framework. Since it has been established that torture and cruel inhuman and degrading treatment (CIDT) usually occur in situations where persons are deprived of personal liberty, I examine legislation, policies and practices applicable to specific places of detention, such as correctional centres, police custody, repatriation centers, mental health care facilities and child and youth care centers. I establish that although South Africa has ratified the UNCAT and is a signatory to the OPCAT, our legal system greatly lacks in structure and in mechanisms of enforcement, as far as the absolute prohibition and the prevention of torture and other forms of cruel and degrading treatment or punishment are concerned. I submit that South Africa has a special duty to eradicate torture, since many of its citizens and several of its political leaders are actually victims of torture, who suffered severe ill treatment under the apartheid regime. I argue that the South African legal system is sufficiently capable of adopting a zero-tolerance policy toward torture and to incorporate this with the general stance against crime. In many respects, South Africa is an example to other African countries and should strongly condemn all forms of human rights violations, especially torture, since acts of torture are often perpetrated by public officials who abuse their positions of authority. I conclude by making submissions and recommendations for law reform, in light of the obstacles encountered within a South African context. / South Africa

Les conditions d'exécution de toute mesure privative de liberté sont déterminantes de son sens et de son efficacité en termes de réinsertion et lutte contre la récidive. La préservation de l'intégrité physique et psychique des personnes détenues constitue un facteur de légitimité indéniable de l'institution carcérale et de son rôle au sein d'une société démocratique. En vertu des articles 2 et 3 de la Convention européenne des droits de l'homme, qui protègent respectivement le droit à la vie et la prohibition des traitements inhumains et dégradants, la jurisprudence européenne a identifié une pluralité d'obligations mises à la charge des États. Les atteintes portées à l'intégrité des personnes détenues dans le cadre de la détention carcérale peuvent être directement imputable à l'État lorsqu'elles résultent du fonctionnement officiel de l'institution, en particulier des fouilles, des placements à l'isolement, des rotations de sécurité, ou des conditions de détention. Elles peuvent aussi lui être indirectement imputables, lorsque la défaillance étatique a permis ou toléré la réalisation d'un acte particulier violant ces droits absolus protégés. L'élaboration des critères d'imputation à l'État de ces atteintes au droit à l'intégrité des personnes détenues et les limites de la responsabilité étatique sont précisément déterminées par la définition et l'intensité des obligations européennes. Si la Cour de Strasbourg apparaît comme le premier facteur de la mutation du droit pénitentiaire et d'une protection renforcée des droits des personnes incarcérées, les lacunes de sa jurisprudence pourraient avoir des effets contradictoires et faire obstacle à l'élaboration d'une théorie cohérente et systématisée des obligations conventionnelles européennes. / The conditions of enforcement of any custodial measure are crucial for its meaning and effectiveness in tenns of reinsertion and the prevention ofreoffending. The preservation of the prisoners' physical and psychological integrity is a source oflegitimacy for the prison institution and its function in a democratic society. Under articles 2 and 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which are respectively protecting the right to life and the prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment, the European Court ofHuman Rights, in its case law, bas identified numerous obligations imposed on Member States. The violations of the prisoners' integrity during custody can be directly imputable to the State when resulting from the official functioning of the institution, especially bodil searches, solitary confinements, security rotations, or conditions of imprisonment. The violations can also be indirectly imputable to the State when its own failure pennitted or tolerated a violation of these absolute rights by a private person. The development of the criteria for violations of prisoners' integrity and the limits of the State responsibility are precisely delineated by the definition and the intensity of European obligations. If the European Court ofHuman Rights appears to be the primary cause of the changing nature of prison and of an increased protection of the prisoners' rights, the loopholes of its case law might have contradictory effects and stand in the way of a coherent theory of the obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights.

Approved for public release / The atrocities committed by Americans at Abu Ghraib shocked the collective American moral conscience. Guilty of inhumane treatment of its prisoners there, Abu Ghraib did immeasurable damage to U.S. credibility and made clear that American detainee policy is off-track and needs to comply with objective standards of law, morality, and operational effectiveness. The emotional aftermath of 9/11 created a politically permissive environment within which the military organizational structures was unsuited for the critical tasks assigned to them relative to the context of the Bush Administration’s “new paradigm.” Two issues sit at the forefront of the political context of U.S. detainee policy: war powers and human rights. This thesis will utilize a synthesized decision-making model to analyze the President’s decisions leading to the current detainee policy. Policy alternatives require smaller corrections to bureaucratic process, not a major reorganization of bureaucratic structure. This thesis will provide policy-makers with a moral and legal framework for a corrected detainee policy. Adoption of the full framework of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, including U.S. ratification of Additional Protocols I and II (1977), provides the best framework to combat transnational insurgency, while retaining the moral and legal high ground required of the world’s superpower. / Major, United States Air Force

General approach of international law to torture Abstract The prohibition of torture exists at national and international level. The author focuses only on the general approach of international law to torture. He analyzes the individual elements of the definitions of torture contained in international documents. At the same time, he does not forget to mention the cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment that is inextricably linked to torture. He also highlights the importance of the threat of torture, which may under certain conditions separately constitute torture. He provides an overview of the current international regulation of the prohibition of torture enshrined not only in international human rights treaties, but also in the field of international humanitarian law and international criminal law. He also emphasizes the reflection of international regulation in the practice of individual protection mechanisms ensuring effective control over compliance with the prohibition of torture, specifically universal, European, Inter-American, African and other functioning mechanisms. Also, he places torture in the context of crimes under international law. He refers to the practice of the International Criminal Court and ad hoc criminal tribunals, which have even granted status of jus cogens to the...

This limited scope dissertation deals with the protection against torture in international law. The mechanisms which have been established over the years to protect individuals against torture are analysed. The principles of international customary law dealing with torture and the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT) have been examined against the failure by States to honour their obligations under the Treaty and other legal normative rules. This required deep exploration of the definition of torture and how States can compromise the rule of law by manipulating the definition of torture as contemplated by the Treaty or other instruments. Examples from the former US government highlight the ways in which domestic laws can be used and are continued to be used to allow the use of torture. Measures by South Africa in joining the international community in the fight against torture are also discussed as a case study. While all efforts have been made by the South African system to adopt desirable frame works on the protection of individuals against torture, the lack of education on torture remains the down fall of the system. The dissertation clearly explains that universal jurisdiction applies in respect of torture and this is recognised by both treaty law and customary law. Indeed despite all the current measures in place the use of torture persists. The research clearly reveals that countries hide behind their own laws to perpetrate acts of torture. It is then recommended that proper implementation of the legal structures, informed of the objectives of the structures, is essential in completely eradicating torture. / Public, Constitutional, and International Law / LLM

This diploma thesis with the topic of ,,The Concept of Serious Harm in Refugee Law" had three basic objectives. The first one was to analyse single notions which belong to the concept of serious harm. The second objective was to compare the concept of serious harm under the Qualification Directive and under the Czech Asylum Act. By means of the interpretation of single notions of serious harm and the comparison of the Qualification Directive with the Czech Asylum Act, I managed to answer the question ,,who is protected by Article 15 of the Qualification Directive and the second section of paragraph 14a in the Czech Asylum Act," which was the third basic objective of this diploma thesis, and at the same time its research question. My diploma thesis is structured into 6 chapters, further it contains the list of abbreviations, the introduction, the conclusion, the list of literature, the Czech and English abstract, and key words. The first chapter deals with the evolution of the concept of serious harm since the year 2001 till the contemporary version of the Qualification Directive from the year 2011, and with the incorporation of this concept into the Czech Asylum Act. From the depiction of history of the concept of serious harm in this chapter, it resulted how uneasy it was for the member states of...

This limited scope dissertation deals with the protection against torture in international law. The mechanisms which have been established over the years to protect individuals against torture are analysed. The principles of international customary law dealing with torture and the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT) have been examined against the failure by States to honour their obligations under the Treaty and other legal normative rules. This required deep exploration of the definition of torture and how States can compromise the rule of law by manipulating the definition of torture as contemplated by the Treaty or other instruments. Examples from the former US government highlight the ways in which domestic laws can be used and are continued to be used to allow the use of torture. Measures by South Africa in joining the international community in the fight against torture are also discussed as a case study. While all efforts have been made by the South African system to adopt desirable frame works on the protection of individuals against torture, the lack of education on torture remains the down fall of the system. The dissertation clearly explains that universal jurisdiction applies in respect of torture and this is recognised by both treaty law and customary law. Indeed despite all the current measures in place the use of torture persists. The research clearly reveals that countries hide behind their own laws to perpetrate acts of torture. It is then recommended that proper implementation of the legal structures, informed of the objectives of the structures, is essential in completely eradicating torture. / Public, Constitutional, and International Law / LLM

La France a mis en place en juillet 2015 une réforme en vue de transposer le nouveau « paquet asile » européen alors que le Canada a renforcé depuis décembre 2012 ses procédures d’asile en adoptant des changements ayant essentiellement pour objet de lutter contre les abus du système d’asile canadien. En s’orientant vers des politiques dissimulées visant les expulsions expéditives des demandeurs d’asile déboutés et des personnes indignes de la protection, la France et le Canada, connus en tant que terre d’asile, respectent-ils toujours leur obligation international du non-refoulement ? Cette thèse s’appuie sur les lois en vigueur des deux États notamment le Code de l’entrée et du séjour des étrangers et du droit d’asile (France) et la Loi sur l’immigration et la protection des réfugiés (Canada), les jurisprudences nationales et internationales, et les textes internationaux. Elle met en lumière les pratiques et législations nationales relatives à l’octroi de l’asile et à l’éloignement des demandeurs d’asile et des réfugiés qui peuvent ou pourraient porter atteinte au principe de non-refoulement, tel que consacré par le droit international des réfugiés ainsi que par le droit international des droits de l’homme / In July 2015, France adopted an asylum reform bill in order to transpose the EU asylum legislative package. In comparison, Canada has, since 2012, strengthened its national asylum procedures by introducing a number of changes with the objective of preventing the abuse of Canada’s inland refugee determination system. In moving towards hidden policies aimed at the efficiency of removals of failed refugee claimants and persons unworthy of international protection, are France and Canada, known as safe havens, respecting their international obligations of Non-Refoulement ? This thesis focuses on the laws in force in both States in particular the Code of the Entry and Stay of Foreigners and Asylum Law (France) and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (Canada), national and international jurisprudence, and other relevant international documents. The present study aims at highlighting the national legislations and practices relating to the grant of asylum and the expulsion of asylum seekers and refugees which violate or could violate the Principle of Non-Refoulement as enshrined in both International Refugee Law and International Human Rights Law