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

The principle of complementarity is a tool used to punish the commission of core international crimes. A concerted approach is required to combat war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity and aggression. The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court needs to fully appreciate the express and implied discretionary powers of states to ensure all possible accountability mechanisms are explored. Failure by the Prosecutor to do so results in missed opportunities to capitalise on various options related to the proper application of complementarity. Therefore, there is a need for consultations to establish that the International Criminal Court and prosecutions can no longer exist without competing alternatives preferred by states. The current misunderstandings on the application of complementarity are rooted in unresolved state and prosecutorial discretions. The endangering of state discretion threatens the integrity and credibility of the International Criminal Court. The unaddressed question of state discretion is also at the centre of disputes between the African Union and the International Criminal Court. Grey areas in the application of complementarity are clearly visible through the inconsistency and diversity of the International Criminal Court decisions and frequent prosecutorial policy proclamations. As a result, prosecutorial discretion needs to be checked. Prosecutorial discretion is checked at the United Nations, International Criminal Court and state levels. The checks at regional level and by non-prosecutorial options need to be explored. The call is for the International Criminal Court not to neglect the legal-political environment which the Court operates in. The environment is essential in demarcating the exercise of discretions. The Kenyatta case is illustrative of the need to invent an interpretation that reflects the evolving theory to practice reality. The development or amendment of a prosecutorial policy is desirable to give guidance on the value, circumstances and priority accorded to justice. The policy should be comprehensive enough to accommodate mechanisms which advocate for strengthened state discretion. For instance, African Union instruments and treaties reveal that the respect of state discretion is one of the core principles of the African Union system. / Public, Constitutional, and International Law / LL.D.

La thèse porte sur le travail effectué par la justice belge, après la Seconde guerre mondiale, face aux crimes commis par les Allemands contre les Juifs. L'étude porte d'abord sur la mise en place du cadre juridique international et national. Ensuite, elle tente de montrer à travers une étude de cas comment, malgré un cadre juridique trop étroit, les juridictions militaires belges ont tenté de poursuivre et condamner les responsables allemands des persécutions raciales. / Doctorat en Histoire, art et archéologie / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished