<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

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 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