This thesis examines the world of solitary confinement within the prison system. My research was inspired by Ashley Smith, a 19-year old segregated inmate who died in isolation while seven guards watched. This outrageous occurrence prompted me to question the practice of solitary confinement and a prison system in which such an event could occur. Studying the history of solitary confinement left me surprised to learn that it was originally intended as a therapeutic and merciful alternative to the punishments of the day. This revelation was one of a series of inversions that led me to conclude that solitary confinement is a world apart, not just physically, but also socially, temporally and legally. I have concluded that improving the lives of those segregated within our prisons requires the world of solitary confinement to become anchored within the broader legal and social context.

I argue here that the practice of penal torture is not intrinsically wrongful. A common objection against the practice of penal torture is that there is something about penal torture that makes it wrongful, while this is not the case for other modes of punishment. I call this claim the asymmetry thesis. One way to defend this position is to claim that penal torture is intrinsically wrongful. It is the claim I argue against here. I discuss and reject three versions this claim. I first address a version that is based on the idea that penal torture, unlike other modes of punishment, is intrinsically wrong because it is inhuman. I then address a version grounded on the claim that, because penal torture is an assault upon the defenseless, it is morally impermissible. Finally, I discuss a version that concerns the idea that penal torture attacks human dignity and undermine agency.

Refugee torture survivors often present with a myriad of psychological challenges, such as posttraumatic stress and depression, stemming from their exposure to torture and other pre- and post-settlement experiences (Gong-Guy and colleagues, 1991). The present study examined the moderating effect of four coping processes (i.e., family support, religious beliefs, political beliefs, and will to survive) on the relationship between cumulative torture and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among a sample of 204 (N=204) adult refugee torture survivors. Subjects completed a demographic questionnaire, the Torture Severity Scale (TSS; Kira, Lewandowski, Templin, Ramaswamy, Ozkan, Hammad, & Mohanesh, 2006), the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS-2; Weathers, Keane, & Davidson, 2001), and the Means of Survival Scale (MOS; Kira, 2012). Twenty-three percent (N = 74) of the sample endorsed clinically significant levels of PTSD. Torture and PTSD were positively associated, indicating that greater exposure to cumulative torture is associated with greater trauma symptoms (r[2] = .18, pppppp2 = .039; F (2,323) = 7.55, p=.001. None of the interaction terms examined accounted for significant variation in PTSD symptoms. Study findings will help counseling psychologists devise the most appropriate treatment plans and strategies to treat posttraumatic stress reactions among refugee torture survivors, as well as inform future interventions developed for this vulnerable population.

Prisoners are among the most vulnerable categories of citizens in every country, due to the large amount of control the state has over them. Enforcing Human Rights Law is a challenge in all areas that it covers. However, ensuring human rights for those behind bars sometimes seems nearly impossible because of the isolation, the lack of interest of the outside world and mostly because of the sometimes conflicting goals that Correctional Law and Human Rights Law seem to have. This is why this thesis focuses on the protection of convicts against torture and ill-treatment. The structure is that of a comparison between the regional protection granted to these people by the European Court of Human Rights and the local avenues granted in Canada, a country that does not benefit from a regional protection for its citizens. The purpose is to analyze how convicts can best fight abuses in a world where their inherent rights are increasingly ignored in the name of security. The parallel between a regional system and a national one will be developed by discussing and comparing the shared human rights framework provided by international instruments, the case law and the evolving principles for convicts’ protection in Europe and Canada, the abuses that take place in both regions under consideration and, finally, how these abuses are addressed and remediated by the authorities. I conclude by pointing out the importance of developing a strong national correctional system that obeys Human Rights Law and that is permanently under the national courts’ jurisdiction. Nevertheless, based on this analysis, I believe it is crucial that there also be an external monitoring and juridical mechanism that can enforce human rights when the national authorities deliberately or accidentally ignore them. It is hazardous to leave the protection of human rights, especially of those in an enclosed environment, to the state which sometimes has conflicting interests and which in most cases is the one that trespasses them. / Thesis (Master, Law) -- Queen's University, 2011-08-31 16:39:13.535

Thesis (M.A. in communication)--Washington State University, May 2008. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 131-160).

This thesis seeks to identify the moral wrong of torture, and to trace the relationship between that wrong and the definition of torture in international law. Because understanding a concept's modern manifestation requires an understanding of its history, the thesis begins by tracing the historical trajectory of legal prohibitions of different forms of ill-treatment beginning with the English Bill of Rights in 1689, subsequently articulated in the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights, that 'no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment'. This prohibition, almost universally accepted by States, has come to be interpreted as embodying a hierarchy with torture at the apex. The shift towards a hierarchical interpretation of the prohibition of torture and ill-treatment in international law was remarkable, both for its decisiveness and for its surprisingly recent occurrence. The reasons for that shift are examined, before turning to a consideration of the competing accounts of what it is that makes torture wrong. Two predominant accounts of the moral wrong of torture are identified, described here as the 'dignitarian' and the 'defencelessness' accounts. Although most international instruments and judicial decisions on torture implicitly reflect the dignitarian account, the thesis argues that this account is open to challenge on normative grounds. Instead, it argues that the preferable account of the moral wrong of torture is a modified form of the defencelessness account, according to which torture is the deliberate infliction of severe pain or suffering in the context of a profoundly asymmetric power relation. Finally, the thesis turns to a consideration of the definitions of torture in international law. It contends that there are distinct conceptions of torture operating in the criminal paradigm, and in the human rights paradigm, respectively. While both conceptions of torture at present reflect the dignitarian account, the thesis argues that there is scope in the human rights paradigm for a more expansive 'defencelessness' conception of torture to be adopted.

Debates about the use of torture in order to protect democracy have become increasingly prevalent in the wake of September 11, 2001 and the war on terror. This thesis examines pro-torture arguments based on considerations of national security. Recently these arguments have had the most traction when advanced within the republican mode of democratic theory. I argue that torture undermines democratic legitimacy because of the secrecy it involves when used for interrogational purposes. Publicity about acts committed in the name of the demos is an essential aspect of democratic legitimacy. For interrogational torture to be effective, major features of its use must be kept secret. This secrecy is incompatible with classical republicanism and the theory of collective responsibility it entails because it interferes with the ability of the people to participate meaningfully in democracy, which is an essential feature of republicanism. / Graduate

Although the U.S. houses five percent of the world's population, we have the highest incarceration numbers on earth, with more than two million people behind bars. The penal institution has neither deterred crime nor effectively rehabilitated the criminal. Prisons are overcrowded, understaffed, and have funding issues, yet the system prevails. If a business was spending billions of dollars, yet failing at its stated mission, investors would pull their funds and the business would fold. For a massive failing system to persist uninterrupted it must be fulfilling some need. What prison does is punish millions of bodies. Since this is what the system succeeds at, this is the need it must be fulfilling. I argue that this need is exacerbated by institutions that promote body aversion and activate in us a latent tendency for the flawed sinful body to be chastised. Reformists have made efforts at changing the system, and former political prisoner, Angela Davis, has called for the system to be abolished. I argue that before reform or abolition can be successful, there must be a change in perception of the human body. This study delves into how our collective need to punish bodies is illustrated in ancient rituals of sacrifice, which evolved into torture in the public square, before the penal institution took root. Myriad institutions take their toll on our perceptions of the body, and corporations exploit prisoners for free labor in a land where slavery is supposedly outlawed.

In this project I investigate the factors shaping compliance with international human rights agreements and I provide a definition of compliance, which goes beyond “ratification.” I argue that compliance is a multistage process, built upon three different steps: ratification/accession, implementation, and what I call “compliant behavior.” As an alternative to the dominant structural and normative explanation of compliance, I suggest that the factors affecting compliance are not only endogenous to state characteristics, such as the democratic/non-democratic nature of governments, but also exogenous, such as the perceived level of threat to national security. I offer a twofold theory that looks at leaders’ behavior under conditions of stability and instability and I suggest that under certain circumstances that threaten and pressure government leaders, state compliance with international human rights law becomes more costly. I suggest that regardless of regime type, threats shape leaders’ behavior toward international law; states are faced with the choice to abide by international obligations, protecting specific human rights, and the choice to protect their national interests. I argue that when the costs associated with compliance increase, because leaders face threats to their power and government stability, threats become the predictor of non-compliant behavior regardless of the democratic or non-democratic nature of the regime.

Thesis (D. Min.)--Catholic Theological Union at Chicago, 2002. / Vita. Includes abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 208-213).