The Concept of Inhuman or Degrading Treatment in International Law and its Application in Asylum Cases

International Journal of Refugee Law

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 637-661

  Fabbricotti, Alberta ^a,b  

^a SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CAMERINO   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0347287724     PISSN: 09538186     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ijrl/10.4.637     Document Type: Article

References (163)

1. Art. 1A(2) provides that the term 'refugee' shall apply to any person who 'owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country'.
2. Art. 33(1) CSR51. On the non-refoulement principle, see, Goodwin-Gill, G.S., The Refugee in International Law, 2nd ed., 1996, Ch. 4; Hailbronner K., 'Non-Refoulement and "Humanitarian" Refugees: Customary International Law or Wishful Legal Thinking?' 26 Virginia J. Int'l Law 897 (1986); also Gilbert, G., Aspects of Extradition Law, Dordrecht-Boston-London (Nijhoff), 1991, 231ff.; Crepeau, F., Droit d'Asile. De l'hospitalité aux contrôles migratoires, Bruxelles (Bruylant), 1995, 162ff.
3. Art. 33(1) CSR51. On the non-refoulement principle, see, Goodwin-Gill, G.S., The Refugee in International Law, 2nd ed., 1996, Ch. 4; Hailbronner K., 'Non-Refoulement and "Humanitarian" Refugees: Customary International Law or Wishful Legal Thinking?' 26 Virginia J. Int'l Law 897 (1986); also Gilbert, G., Aspects of Extradition Law, Dordrecht-Boston-London (Nijhoff), 1991, 231ff.; Crepeau, F., Droit d'Asile. De l'hospitalité aux contrôles migratoires, Bruxelles (Bruylant), 1995, 162ff.
4. Art. 33(1) CSR51. On the non-refoulement principle, see, Goodwin-Gill, G.S., The Refugee in International Law, 2nd ed., 1996, Ch. 4; Hailbronner K., 'Non-Refoulement and "Humanitarian" Refugees: Customary International Law or Wishful Legal Thinking?' 26 Virginia J. Int'l Law 897 (1986); also Gilbert, G., Aspects of Extradition Law, Dordrecht-Boston-London (Nijhoff), 1991, 231ff.; Crepeau, F., Droit d'Asile. De l'hospitalité aux contrôles migratoires, Bruxelles (Bruylant), 1995, 162ff.
5. Art. 33(1) CSR51. On the non-refoulement principle, see, Goodwin-Gill, G.S., The Refugee in International Law, 2nd ed., 1996, Ch. 4; Hailbronner K., 'Non-Refoulement and "Humanitarian" Refugees: Customary International Law or Wishful Legal Thinking?' 26 Virginia J. Int'l Law 897 (1986); also Gilbert, G., Aspects of Extradition Law, Dordrecht-Boston-London (Nijhoff), 1991, 231ff.; Crepeau, F., Droit d'Asile. De l'hospitalité aux contrôles migratoires, Bruxelles (Bruylant), 1995, 162ff.
6. Art. 5 UDHR48.
7. See, for instance, the strong opposition of Mr Aquino, the Philippines representative, to the Cuban representative's proposal to replace the word 'inhuman' with the word 'non-customary': 'The Cuban representative's proposal was not acceptable. Customs varied from country to country and what was not customary was not necessarily degrading. The Nazis could have claimed that their torture chambers were perfectly legal because it was customary to make use of them in Nazi Germany', in Official Records of the Third Session of the General Assembly (UNGAOR), Part I - Third Committee Summary Records of Meetings, 21 Sept.-8 Dec. 1948, 215.
8. Therefore, the undertaking not to expose anyone to an inhuman or degrading treatment represents an area in which the two fields of human rights and humanitarian law converge. On this issue, see Greppi, E., 'Diritto internazionale umanitario dei conflitti armati e diritti umani: profili di una convergenza', in 51 La Comunità Internazionale (1996), 473ff., esp. note 61.
9. 'No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment'.
10. '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'.
11. 'Right to Humane Treatment. (1) Every person has the right to have his physical, mental, and moral integrity respected; (2) No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment or treatment. All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person; (3) Punishment shall not be extended to any person other than the criminal; (4) Accused persons shall, save in exceptional circumstances, be segregated from convicted persons, and shall be subject to separate treatment appropriate to their status as unconvicted persons; (5) Minors while subject to criminal proceedings shall be separated from adults and brought before specialized tribunals, as speedily as possible, so that they may be treated in accordance with their status as minors; (6) Punishments consisting of deprivation of liberty shall have as an essential aim the reform and social readaptation of the prisoners'.
12. 'Every individual shall have the right to the respect of the dignity inherent in a human being and to the recognition of his legal status. All forms of exploitation and degradation of man particularly slavery, slave trade, torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment and treatment shall be prohibited'.
13. Article II PPCG48 considers as 'genocide' not only killing members of national, ethnic, racial or religious groups, but also acts causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group, deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part, imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group, and forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
14. 'For the purpose of the present Convention, the term 'the crime of apartheid' . . . shall apply to the following inhuman acts . . . (a) Denial to a member or members of a racial group or groups of the right to life and liberty of person . . . (ii) by the infliction upon the members of a racial group or groups of serious bodily or mental harm, by the infringement of their freedom or dignity, or by subjecting them to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment . . . '
15. UN doc. A/RES/39/46, 10 Dec. 1984.
16. OAS, Treaty Series, No. 67.
17. Council of Europe, European Treaty Series, vol. 126.
18. Art. 1 of the Declaration affirms that an act of enforced disappearance constitutes not only a denial of the purposes of the UN Charter and a grave and flagrant violation of the human rights, but also a violation of the rules of international law guaranteeing, inter alia, the right not to be subjected to torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
19. 'States Parties shall ensure that: (a) No child shall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment without possibility of release shall be imposed for offences committed by persons below eighteen years of age . . . '
20. 'No migrant worker or member of his or her family shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment'.
21. 'Corporal punishment, punishment by placing in a dark cell, and all cruel, inhuman or degrading punishments shall be completely prohibited as punishments for disciplinary offences'.
22. 'No law enforcement official may inflict, instigate or tolerate any act of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, nor may any law enforcement official invoke superior orders or exceptional circumstances such as a state of war or a threat of war, a threat to national security, internal political instability or any other public emergency as a justification of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment'.
23. 'It is a gross contravention of medical ethics, as well as an offence under applicable international instruments, for health personnel, particularly physicians, to engage, actively or passively, in acts which constitute participation in, complicity in, incitement to or attempts to commit torture or other cruel inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment'.
24. 'No person under any form of detention or imprisonment shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. No circumstance whatever may be invoked as a justification for torture or other cruel inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment'.
25. 'All disciplinary measures constituting cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment shall be strictly prohibited, including corporal punishment, placement in a dark cell, closed or solitary confinement or any other punishment that may compromise the physical or mental health of the juvenile concerned'.
26. Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, Geneva Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War and Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949.
27. On this terminology, see, in general, Schachter, O., 'Human Dignity as a Normative Concept', 77 AJIL 848 (1983).
28. 'Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if committed against persons or property protected by the Convention: wilful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments, wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, and extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly'.
29. For a critical analysis of the Draft Code leading to the conclusion that 'a slimming regime was desirable', see Rayfuse, 'The Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind: Eating Disorders at the International Law Commission', in 8 Criminal Law Forum 43 (1997).
30. Art. 18 of the Draft Code also prohibits 'inhumane acts which severely damage physical or mental integrity health or human dignity, such as mutilation and severe bodily harm', which are already listed among the 'crimes against humanity'.
31. Consequently, we do not necessarily agree with the assertion that the fourth category of war crimes addressed in art. 20(d), namely, outrages upon personal dignity in violation of international humanitarian law, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment, rape, enforced prostitution and any form of indecent assault, 'clearly constitutes a grave breach of Geneva Conventions I to IV under subparagraph (a) (ii) and (iii)'. See Commentary to Article 20 of the Draft Code . . . , para. 12. Since para. (a)(ii) and (iii) mention respectively 'torture or inhuman treatment' and 'wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health', it seems that the above opinion applies only in relation to rape (and probably enforced prostitution). Rape at least is an act 'wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health' or even an act of 'torture'. As early as 1958, the ICRC Commentary on the Fourth Geneva Convention recognized that the grave breach of 'inhuman treatment' (art. 147) should be interpreted as including rape. See Meron, T., 'Rape as a Crime under International Humanitarian Law', in 87 AJIL 424 (1993), esp. note 21. Moreover, the vague expressions 'humiliating and degrading treatment' or 'any form in indecent assault' may imply criminal acts of a different degree of gravity and inflicting sufferings probably lower than those caused by the crimes described in para. (a)(ii) and (iii).
32. Statute of the International Criminal Court, adopted in Rome by the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court on 17 July 1998, Art. 8 (War Crimes): '(1) The Court shall have jurisdiction in respect of war crimes in particular when committed as a part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes; (2) For the purpose of this Statute, 'war crimes' means: (a) Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, namely, any of the following acts against persons or property protected under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention . . . '
33. 'The International Tribunal shall have the power to prosecute persons committing or ordering to be committed grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 . . . ' The relevant rule of the Geneva Conventions is cited more fully below.
34. On this issue, see Meindersma, C., 'Violations of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions as Violations of the Laws or Customs of War under Article 3 of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia', in 42 Netherlands Int'l Law Review 375, 393 (1995); Von Sternberg, M.R., 'A Comparison of the Yugoslavian and Rwandan War Crimes Tribunals: Universal Jurisdiction and the "Elementary Dictates of Humanity",' 22 Brooklyn J. Int'l L. 111 (1996); Sassoli, M., 'Le rôle des tribunaux pénaux internationaux dans la répression des crimes de guerre', in Lattanzi, F. and Sciso, E., eds., Da tribunali penali internazionali ad hoc a una corte permanente, Napoli, (1996), 109.
35. On this issue, see Meindersma, C., 'Violations of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions as Violations of the Laws or Customs of War under Article 3 of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia', in 42 Netherlands Int'l Law Review 375, 393 (1995); Von Sternberg, M.R., 'A Comparison of the Yugoslavian and Rwandan War Crimes Tribunals: Universal Jurisdiction and the "Elementary Dictates of Humanity",' 22 Brooklyn J. Int'l L. 111 (1996); Sassoli, M., 'Le rôle des tribunaux pénaux internationaux dans la répression des crimes de guerre', in Lattanzi, F. and Sciso, E., eds., Da tribunali penali internazionali ad hoc a una corte permanente, Napoli, (1996), 109.
36. On this issue, see Meindersma, C., 'Violations of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions as Violations of the Laws or Customs of War under Article 3 of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia', in 42 Netherlands Int'l Law Review 375, 393 (1995); Von Sternberg, M.R., 'A Comparison of the Yugoslavian and Rwandan War Crimes Tribunals: Universal Jurisdiction and the "Elementary Dictates of Humanity",' 22 Brooklyn J. Int'l L. 111 (1996); Sassoli, M., 'Le rôle des tribunaux pénaux internationaux dans la répression des crimes de guerre', in Lattanzi, F. and Sciso, E., eds., Da tribunali penali internazionali ad hoc a una corte permanente, Napoli, (1996), 109.
37. 'Outrages upon personal dignity' are listed in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court among the acts that constitute 'war crimes' as far as they produce, according to art. 8, para. 2(b)(xxi) of the Statute, 'Other (than grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions) serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law'.
38. In order to make the reading of this article easier, reference is made hereafter simply to 'treatment', which is broader in scope than the word 'punishment'; on this point, see Bossuyt, M.J., Guide to the 'Travaux Préparatoires' of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Dordrecht-Boston-Lancaster, Nijhoff (1987), 150.
39. The definition is provided in the first article of the Convention: 'For the purposes of this Convention, the term "torture" means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.' On this definition, see Marchesi, A., 'Il divieto di tortura nel diritto internazionale generale', 76 Rivista di Diritto Internazionale 986 (1993). Cf. the wider definition in art. 2, 1985 Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture.
40. Burgers, J.H. and Danelius, H., in The United Nations Convention against Torture. A Handbook on the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Dordrecht, Nijhoff (1988), 70, report that during the drafting of the Convention it soon appeared impossible to define in precise terms the concept of 'cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment' and therefore to attach to this terminology specific legal obligations in the Convention. However, most delegates in the Working Group wished the convention to deal primarily with torture, while leaving open whether some of its provisions could be made applicable also to the other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. On the distinction between torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in the context of this Convention, see also Byrnes, A., 'The Committee against Torture', in Alston, P., ed., The United Nations and Human Rights, Oxford, Clarendon Press, (1992), 513.
41. Burgers, J.H. and Danelius, H., in The United Nations Convention against Torture. A Handbook on the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Dordrecht, Nijhoff (1988), 70, report that during the drafting of the Convention it soon appeared impossible to define in precise terms the concept of 'cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment' and therefore to attach to this terminology specific legal obligations in the Convention. However, most delegates in the Working Group wished the convention to deal primarily with torture, while leaving open whether some of its provisions could be made applicable also to the other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. On the distinction between torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in the context of this Convention, see also Byrnes, A., 'The Committee against Torture', in Alston, P., ed., The United Nations and Human Rights, Oxford, Clarendon Press, (1992), 513.
42. See, for instance, the Report of the first Special Rapporteur in UN doc. E/CN.4/1986/15; and, for more recent Reports, UN docs. E/CN.4/1994/31, E/CN.4/1995/34, E/CN.4/1995/34/Add.1/ Corr.1, E/CN.4/1996/35, E/CN.4/1996/35/Add.1, E/CN.4/1996/35/Add.2, E/CN.4/1997/7, E/CN.4/1997/7/Add.1, E/CN.4/1997/7/Add.2.
43. On this general topic, see Doswald-Beck, L., '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', 25 Neth. Int'l L. Review 24 (1978); Duffy, P.J., 'Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights', 32 ICLQ, 316; Sudre F., 'La notion de "peines et traitements inhumains ou dégradants" dans la jurisprudence de la Commission et de la Cour Européennes des Droits de l'Homme,' 88 Revue Générale de Droit International Public, 825 (1984); Rodley, N., The Treatment of Prisoners under International Law, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 91, (1987); Cassese, A., 'Prohibition of Torture and Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment', in MacDonald R.S.J. et al., eds., The European System for the Protection of Human Rights, Dordrecht, Nijhoff, 225, (1993); Tacchinardi, M., 'L'art. 3 della Convenzione Europea per la Salvaguardia dei Diritti dell'Uomo e delle Libertà Fondamentali', 2 Rivista Internazionale dei Diritti dell'Uomo 314 (1995).
44. On this general topic, see Doswald-Beck, L., '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', 25 Neth. Int'l L. Review 24 (1978); Duffy, P.J., 'Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights', 32 ICLQ, 316; Sudre F., 'La notion de "peines et traitements inhumains ou dégradants" dans la jurisprudence de la Commission et de la Cour Européennes des Droits de l'Homme,' 88 Revue Générale de Droit International Public, 825 (1984); Rodley, N., The Treatment of Prisoners under International Law, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 91, (1987); Cassese, A., 'Prohibition of Torture and Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment', in MacDonald R.S.J. et al., eds., The European System for the Protection of Human Rights, Dordrecht, Nijhoff, 225, (1993); Tacchinardi, M., 'L'art. 3 della Convenzione Europea per la Salvaguardia dei Diritti dell'Uomo e delle Libertà Fondamentali', 2 Rivista Internazionale dei Diritti dell'Uomo 314 (1995).
45. On this general topic, see Doswald-Beck, L., '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', 25 Neth. Int'l L. Review 24 (1978); Duffy, P.J., 'Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights', 32 ICLQ, 316; Sudre F., 'La notion de "peines et traitements inhumains ou dégradants" dans la jurisprudence de la Commission et de la Cour Européennes des Droits de l'Homme,' 88 Revue Générale de Droit International Public, 825 (1984); Rodley, N., The Treatment of Prisoners under International Law, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 91, (1987); Cassese, A., 'Prohibition of Torture and Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment', in MacDonald R.S.J. et al., eds., The European System for the Protection of Human Rights, Dordrecht, Nijhoff, 225, (1993); Tacchinardi, M., 'L'art. 3 della Convenzione Europea per la Salvaguardia dei Diritti dell'Uomo e delle Libertà Fondamentali', 2 Rivista Internazionale dei Diritti dell'Uomo 314 (1995).
46. On this general topic, see Doswald-Beck, L., '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', 25 Neth. Int'l L. Review 24 (1978); Duffy, P.J., 'Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights', 32 ICLQ, 316; Sudre F., 'La notion de "peines et traitements inhumains ou dégradants" dans la jurisprudence de la Commission et de la Cour Européennes des Droits de l'Homme,' 88 Revue Générale de Droit International Public, 825 (1984); Rodley, N., The Treatment of Prisoners under International Law, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 91, (1987); Cassese, A., 'Prohibition of Torture and Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment', in MacDonald R.S.J. et al., eds., The European System for the Protection of Human Rights, Dordrecht, Nijhoff, 225, (1993); Tacchinardi, M., 'L'art. 3 della Convenzione Europea per la Salvaguardia dei Diritti dell'Uomo e delle Libertà Fondamentali', 2 Rivista Internazionale dei Diritti dell'Uomo 314 (1995).
47. On this general topic, see Doswald-Beck, L., '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', 25 Neth. Int'l L. Review 24 (1978); Duffy, P.J., 'Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights', 32 ICLQ, 316; Sudre F., 'La notion de "peines et traitements inhumains ou dégradants" dans la jurisprudence de la Commission et de la Cour Européennes des Droits de l'Homme,' 88 Revue Générale de Droit International Public, 825 (1984); Rodley, N., The Treatment of Prisoners under International Law, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 91, (1987); Cassese, A., 'Prohibition of Torture and Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment', in MacDonald R.S.J. et al., eds., The European System for the Protection of Human Rights, Dordrecht, Nijhoff, 225, (1993); Tacchinardi, M., 'L'art. 3 della Convenzione Europea per la Salvaguardia dei Diritti dell'Uomo e delle Libertà Fondamentali', 2 Rivista Internazionale dei Diritti dell'Uomo 314 (1995).
48. On this general topic, see Doswald-Beck, L., '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', 25 Neth. Int'l L. Review 24 (1978); Duffy, P.J., 'Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights', 32 ICLQ, 316; Sudre F., 'La notion de "peines et traitements inhumains ou dégradants" dans la jurisprudence de la Commission et de la Cour Européennes des Droits de l'Homme,' 88 Revue Générale de Droit International Public, 825 (1984); Rodley, N., The Treatment of Prisoners under International Law, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 91, (1987); Cassese, A., 'Prohibition of Torture and Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment', in MacDonald R.S.J. et al., eds., The European System for the Protection of Human Rights, Dordrecht, Nijhoff, 225, (1993); Tacchinardi, M., 'L'art. 3 della Convenzione Europea per la Salvaguardia dei Diritti dell'Uomo e delle Libertà Fondamentali', 2 Rivista Internazionale dei Diritti dell'Uomo 314 (1995).
49. See the Report of the Commission (5 Nov. 1969) on Applications Denmark v. Greece No. 3321/ 67; Norway v. Greece No. 3322/67; Sweden v. Greece No. 3323/67; Netherlands v. Greece No. 3344/67, in 12 Yearbook of the European Convention on Human Rights (1969), 501, §11.
50. See the Judgment of the Court of 18 Jan. 1978 on Application No. 5310/71, in Reports of Judgments and Decisions, Series A, No. 25, 65, §162.
51. See the Tyrer judgment of 25 Apr. 1978, in Reports, Series A, No. 26, 14-15, §§29, 30. For comment, see Higgins, R., 'The European Convention on Human Rights', in Meron, T. ed., Human Rights in International Law, Oxford, Clarendon Press, (1984), 513.
52. See above, notes 39 and 40.
53. Soering v. United Kingdom, Judgment of 7 Jul. 1989, in (Reports), Series A, No. 161, §§104, reproduced in 11 Human Rights Law Journal 335 (1990).
54. See Sudre, above note 37, at 865, 888; Tacchinardi, above note 37, 323.
55. This conclusion was partly reached during the elaboration of art. 7 ICCPR66, when 'it was observed that the word "treatment" should not apply to degrading situations which might be due to general economic and social factors'. See, Bossuyt, above note 33, 150.
56. As argued by Oraá, J., Human Rights in States of Emergency in International Law, Oxford, Clarendon Press, (1992), 96: 'The three lists of non-derogable rights in the three treaties (ICCPR, European Convention and ACHR) under consideration contain four rights which are non-derogable in all of the treaties. These four rights are: the right to life, the right to be free from torture and other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the right to be free from slavery or servitude, and the principle of non-retroactivity of penal laws. These rights are so fundamental that they are considered to be not only customary international law but also norms of ius cogens'.
57. This expression is said to belong to Vasak, 'Droits garantis par la Convention', in 155F Jurisclasseur de Droit International, §14, quoted in Sudre, above note 37, 856.
58. In its Report of 5 Nov. 1969 in the Greek Case, (above note 38, at 186, §2), for instance, the Commission took the following view: '[i]t is plain that there may be treatment to which all these descriptions apply, for all torture must be inhuman and degrading treatment, and inhuman treatment also degrading'. But see also the Court's reference in the Ireland Case (above note 39, §167) to art. 1 of UNGA res. 3452(XXX), 9 Dec. 1975, which declares: '[t]orture constitutes an aggravated and deliberate form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment'. For a critical comment on the Court's conclusion in the Ireland Case that certain interrogation procedures (the so-called 'five techniques') did not give rise to the 'very serious and cruel suffering' that distinguishes torture from inhuman treatment, see Spjut, R.J., 'Torture under the European Convention on Human Rights', 73 AJIL 267 (1979); Martin, P.-M., 'A propos de l'article 3 de la Convention Européenne des Droits de l'Homme: l'Arrêt de la Cour Européenne des Droits de l'Homme dans l'Affaire Irlande c. Royaume-Uni', 83 Revue Générale de Droit International Public 104 (1979).
59. In its Report of 5 Nov. 1969 in the Greek Case, (above note 38, at 186, §2), for instance, the Commission took the following view: '[i]t is plain that there may be treatment to which all these descriptions apply, for all torture must be inhuman and degrading treatment, and inhuman treatment also degrading'. But see also the Court's reference in the Ireland Case (above note 39, §167) to art. 1 of UNGA res. 3452(XXX), 9 Dec. 1975, which declares: '[t]orture constitutes an aggravated and deliberate form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment'. For a critical comment on the Court's conclusion in the Ireland Case that certain interrogation procedures (the so-called 'five techniques') did not give rise to the 'very serious and cruel suffering' that distinguishes torture from inhuman treatment, see Spjut, R.J., 'Torture under the European Convention on Human Rights', 73 AJIL 267 (1979); Martin, P.-M., 'A propos de l'article 3 de la Convention Européenne des Droits de l'Homme: l'Arrêt de la Cour Européenne des Droits de l'Homme dans l'Affaire Irlande c. Royaume-Uni', 83 Revue Générale de Droit International Public 104 (1979).
60. One example is provided by the reading a contrario of art. 16(1) CAT84: 'Each State Party shall undertake to prevent in any territory under its jurisdiction other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment which do not amount to torture . . . '
61. Hurtado v. Switzerland, Judgment of the Court, 20 Jan. 1994, Publications of the European Court of Human Rights, Series A, Vol. 280-A, 3 ff.
62. On this evolution of the Strasbourg case-law, see Gaeta, P., 'Cancellazione dal ruolo e trattamenti inumani o degradanti: l'affare Hurtado dinanzi alia Corte Europea', 78 Rivista di Diritto Internazionale 157 (1995). The author notes that, for the first time in its Report on the Hurtado Case, the Commission omitted to add that the State's inhuman conduct was also degrading.
63. As a matter of fact, the Human Rights Committee does not automatically substantiate a charge of degrading treatment on the ground that an inhuman conduct has been committed. See, among others, Ng v. Canada, Communication No. 469/1991: UN doc. CCPR/C/49/D/469/1991 (1994), also in 15 HRLJ 149 (1994); Mohammed Bashir El-Megreisi v. Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Communication No. 440/1990: UN doc. A/49/40, Vol. II, 128; Katombe L. Tshishimbi v. Zaire, Communication No. 542/1993, UN doc. CCPR/C/53/D/542/1993 (1996).
64. 'Report on Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment': UN doc. E/CN.4/1986/15, 19 Feb. 1986, para. 33.
65. Human Rights Committee, 'General Comment 20, Article 7': UN doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev. 1, 30, para. 4.
66. See above, note 38, 186, §2.
67. On this distinction, see Doswald-Beck, above note 37, 32.
68. See van Dijk, P. and van Hoof, G.J.H., Theory and Practice of the ECHR, Deventer-Boston (1990), 229. On whether the requirement of intention should be retained, see also Harris, D.J., O'Boyle, M. and Warbrick, C., Law of the European Convention on Human Rights, London, Butterworths, (1995), 81.
69. See van Dijk, P. and van Hoof, G.J.H., Theory and Practice of the ECHR, Deventer-Boston (1990), 229. On whether the requirement of intention should be retained, see also Harris, D.J., O'Boyle, M. and Warbrick, C., Law of the European Convention on Human Rights, London, Butterworths, (1995), 81.
70. Cf. van Dijk and van Hoof, above note 56.
71. See above note 38, 65, §163.
72. See Judgment of 27 Aug. 1992, in 15 European Human Rights Reports (1993), 1, §115.
73. The Human Rights Committee shares this opinion. See para. 3, 'General Comment 20, Art. 7': 'The text of article 7 allows no limitation. The Committee also reaffirms that, even in situations of public emergency such as those referred to in article 4 of the Covenant, no derogation from the provision of article 7 is allowed and its provisions must remain in force. The Committee likewise observes that no justification or extenuating circumstances may be invoked to excuse a violation of article 7 for any reasons'.
74. Irish Case, above note 39.
75. Soering Case, above note 42.
76. Klaas v. Germany, Appl. No. 15473/89: 18 European Human Rights Reports 305 (1994).
77. Ribitsch v. Austria, Appl. No. 18896/91: 21 European Human Rights Reports 573 (1996).
78. Charles Chitat Ng v. Canada, above, note 51.
79. Albert Womah Mukong v. Cameroun, Communication No. 458/1991: UN doc. A/49/40, vol. II, 171.
80. Mohammed Bashir El-Megreisi v. Libyan Arab Jamahirija, above, note 51.
81. Katombe L. Tshishimbi v. Zaire, above, note 51.
82. See Judgment of 20 Jan. 1989, Doc. (Ser. c) No. 5 (1989), paras. 164, 197.
83. Report of 14 Dec. 1973 (made public on 21 Mar. 1994) on 31 applications of East African Asians v. the United Kingdom, in 15 Human Rights Law Journal 215 (1994).
84. The Commission stated in advance that it would proceed in accordance with the relevant rules of customary law as stated in arts. 31-33 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Consequently, it would first 'examine the ordinary meaning of the term "degrading treatment" in its proper context, combined with the object and purpose of the European Convention on Human Rights'. Subsequently, it would 'take account of the preparatory work, as supplementary means of interpretation, and finally consider the relation of its own jurisprudence to the interpretation reached'; ibid., para. 188.
85. Ibid., paras. 189, 195.
86. Ireland Case, above note 39, 66, para. 167; Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali v. United Kingdom, 7 European Human Rights Reports 471 (1985), paras. 90-1; Soering Case, above note 42, para. 100.
87. East Africans Asians Case, above note 70, para. 207.
88. Tyrer Case, above note 40. In the Costello-Roberts Case, however, the Court considered that three 'whacks' of the slipper on his clothed buttocks received by a seven-year-old boy was a very mild kind of corporal punishment and did not constitute degrading treatment; it had not attained the minimum level of severity required and 'no evidence had been adduced of any severe and long-lasting effects as a result of the treatment complained of': 19 European Human Rights Reports 112 (1995). On this issue, see Phillips, B., 'The Case for Corporal Punishment in the United Kingdom. Beaten into Submission in Europe?', 43 ICLQ 153 (1994). Cf. on the question of reasonable chastisement, A & B v. United Kingdom, 22 European Human Rights Reports (1996), CD190.
89. Hurtado Case, above note 49. According to the report of the Commission quoted in Gaeta, above note 50, 161: 'The conduct of the authorities, who neglected to take the most elementary hygiene measures by failing to make available to the applicant clean clothes to replace those soiled as a result of their action, was humiliating and debasing for the applicant and therefore degrading within the meaning of Article 3 of the Convention'.
90. Victor Francis v. Jamaica, Communication No. 320/1988, Decision of 24 Mar. 1993: UN doc. A/48/40, 307.
91. The Inter-American Court does not so far have appeared to have faced this particular issue when dealing with art. 5 ACHR69.
92. On this topic, see Fabbricotti, A., 'Asylum before the International Bodies for Monitoring the Implementation of Human Rights Treaties', 35(44) AWR-Bulletin 62 (1997); Andrysek, O., 'Gaps in International Protection and the Potential for Redress through Individual Complaints Procedures', 9 IJRL 392 (1997).
93. On this topic, see Fabbricotti, A., 'Asylum before the International Bodies for Monitoring the Implementation of Human Rights Treaties', 35(44) AWR-Bulletin 62 (1997); Andrysek, O., 'Gaps in International Protection and the Potential for Redress through Individual Complaints Procedures', 9 IJRL 392 (1997).
94. In Cruz Varas and Others v. Sweden (20 Mar. 1991) the European Court considered to be applicable to expulsion of asylum seekers the principle already established à propos of extradition. Expulsion by a Contracting State of an asylum seeker may also give rise to an issue under art. 3, and hence engage the responsibility of that State under the Convention, where substantial grounds have been shown for believing that the person concerned faced a real risk of being subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment in the country to which he was returned. Text of decision in 12 Human Rights Law Journal 142 (1991), esp. para. 70. As a precedent, see the decision of the European Commission on Application No. 6315/73 (X. v. Federal Republic of Germany), Tearbook of the European Convention on Human Rights (1974), 481. According to the Commission: 'Where a Contracting State removes an alien from its territory, it is liable under Article 3 of the Convention to the extent to which it directly exposes that person to a risk of treatment contrary to that Article', in Nasri v. France, 21 European Human Rights Reports 467 (1996).
95. Cf. the European Court's judgment in the Soering Case, above note 42; and the Human Rights Committee's views in Kindler v. Canada, Communication No. 470/1991: UN doc. A/48/40, 384; Ng v. Canada, above, note 51; and Cox v. Canada, Communication No. 539/1993: 15 Human Rights Law Journal 410 (1994). See, on this particular topic, Roecks, C.R., 'Extradition, Human Rights, and the Death Penalty: When Nations must refuse to Extradite a Person charged with a Capital Crime', 25 California Western Int'l Law J. 189 (1994); van Der Will, H.G., 'Après Soering: The Relationship between Extradition and Human Rights in the Legal Practice of Germany, The Netherlands and the United States', in 42 Netherlands Int'l Law Review 53 (1995); Padelletti, M.L., 'Estradizione e Convcnzione europea dei diritti dell'uomo', 79 Rivista di Diritto Internazionale 656 (1996).
96. On this issue, see Drzemczewski, A., 'The Position of Aliens in relation to the European Convention on Human Rights: A General Survey', in Proceedings of the Colloquy on 'Human Rights of Aliens in Europe', Funchal-Madeira (Portugal), Dordrecht-Boston-Lancaster (Nijhoff), 1985, 351; Berger, V., Jurisprudence de la Cour Européenne des Droits de l'Homme, 4ème. ed., Paris (Dalloz), 1994, 7, 23; Ermacora, F., 'Problems about the Application of the European Convention on Human Rights in Asylum Cases', in Lawson, R. and de Blois, M., eds., The Dynamics of the Protection of Human Rights in Europe, Essays in Honour of H.G. Schermers, vol. III, Dordrecht, Nijhoff, (1994), 155; Whitney, K.M., 'Does the European Convention on Human Rights protect Refugees from "Safe" Countries?', 26 Georgia J. of Int'l and Comp. Law 375 (1997). Cruz, A., 'Can Article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights provide greater protection to asylum-seekers than the 1951 convention?' 72 Nederlands Junstenblard 672 (1997).
97. On this issue, see Drzemczewski, A., 'The Position of Aliens in relation to the European Convention on Human Rights: A General Survey', in Proceedings of the Colloquy on 'Human Rights of Aliens in Europe', Funchal-Madeira (Portugal), Dordrecht-Boston-Lancaster (Nijhoff), 1985, 351; Berger, V., Jurisprudence de la Cour Européenne des Droits de l'Homme, 4ème. ed., Paris (Dalloz), 1994, 7, 23; Ermacora, F., 'Problems about the Application of the European Convention on Human Rights in Asylum Cases', in Lawson, R. and de Blois, M., eds., The Dynamics of the Protection of Human Rights in Europe, Essays in Honour of H.G. Schermers, vol. III, Dordrecht, Nijhoff, (1994), 155; Whitney, K.M., 'Does the European Convention on Human Rights protect Refugees from "Safe" Countries?', 26 Georgia J. of Int'l and Comp. Law 375 (1997). Cruz, A., 'Can Article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights provide greater protection to asylum-seekers than the 1951 convention?' 72 Nederlands Junstenblard 672 (1997).
98. On this issue, see Drzemczewski, A., 'The Position of Aliens in relation to the European Convention on Human Rights: A General Survey', in Proceedings of the Colloquy on 'Human Rights of Aliens in Europe', Funchal-Madeira (Portugal), Dordrecht-Boston-Lancaster (Nijhoff), 1985, 351; Berger, V., Jurisprudence de la Cour Européenne des Droits de l'Homme, 4ème. ed., Paris (Dalloz), 1994, 7, 23; Ermacora, F., 'Problems about the Application of the European Convention on Human Rights in Asylum Cases', in Lawson, R. and de Blois, M., eds., The Dynamics of the Protection of Human Rights in Europe, Essays in Honour of H.G. Schermers, vol. III, Dordrecht, Nijhoff, (1994), 155; Whitney, K.M., 'Does the European Convention on Human Rights protect Refugees from "Safe" Countries?', 26 Georgia J. of Int'l and Comp. Law 375 (1997). Cruz, A., 'Can Article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights provide greater protection to asylum-seekers than the 1951 convention?' 72 Nederlands Junstenblard 672 (1997).
99. On this issue, see Drzemczewski, A., 'The Position of Aliens in relation to the European Convention on Human Rights: A General Survey', in Proceedings of the Colloquy on 'Human Rights of Aliens in Europe', Funchal-Madeira (Portugal), Dordrecht-Boston-Lancaster (Nijhoff), 1985, 351; Berger, V., Jurisprudence de la Cour Européenne des Droits de l'Homme, 4ème. ed., Paris (Dalloz), 1994, 7, 23; Ermacora, F., 'Problems about the Application of the European Convention on Human Rights in Asylum Cases', in Lawson, R. and de Blois, M., eds., The Dynamics of the Protection of Human Rights in Europe, Essays in Honour of H.G. Schermers, vol. III, Dordrecht, Nijhoff, (1994), 155; Whitney, K.M., 'Does the European Convention on Human Rights protect Refugees from "Safe" Countries?', 26 Georgia J. of Int'l and Comp. Law 375 (1997). Cruz, A., 'Can Article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights provide greater protection to asylum-seekers than the 1951 convention?' 72 Nederlands Junstenblard 672 (1997).
100. On this issue, see Drzemczewski, A., 'The Position of Aliens in relation to the European Convention on Human Rights: A General Survey', in Proceedings of the Colloquy on 'Human Rights of Aliens in Europe', Funchal-Madeira (Portugal), Dordrecht-Boston-Lancaster (Nijhoff), 1985, 351; Berger, V., Jurisprudence de la Cour Européenne des Droits de l'Homme, 4ème. ed., Paris (Dalloz), 1994, 7, 23; Ermacora, F., 'Problems about the Application of the European Convention on Human Rights in Asylum Cases', in Lawson, R. and de Blois, M., eds., The Dynamics of the Protection of Human Rights in Europe, Essays in Honour of H.G. Schermers, vol. III, Dordrecht, Nijhoff, (1994), 155; Whitney, K.M., 'Does the European Convention on Human Rights protect Refugees from "Safe" Countries?', 26 Georgia J. of Int'l and Comp. Law 375 (1997). Cruz, A., 'Can Article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights provide
101. Cruz Varas Case, above note 80, §§75-6.
102. Vilvarajah and Others v. United Kingdom, Judgment of Oct. 1991: 12 Human Rights Law Journal 432 (1991). For comment, see Pedrazzi, F., 'Corte Europea dei Diritti dell'Uomo, richiedenti asilo e procedura di riconoscimento dello status di rifugiato. Considerazioni critiche sulla sentenza Vilvarajah', 5 Rivista Internazionale dei Diritti dell'Uomo 187 (1992); Lammerant, I. and Bossuyt, M., 'La conformité à la Convention européenne des droits de l'homme des mesures d'éloignement du territoire de demandeurs d'asile déboutés', 4 Revue Trimestrielle des Droits de l'Homme 417 (1993). See now, however, the decision of the Commission in Appl. No. 22414/93 (Chahal and Others v. United Kingdom), 18 European Human Rights Reports (1994), CD193; and the Judgment of the Court in that case of 15 Nov. 1996: 9 IJRL 86 (1997).
103. In Mansi v. Sweden, the State admitted to having underestimated the statements of an asylum seeker, a Jordanian citizen of Palestinian origin, about the risk he would face of being persecuted if returned to Jordan and undertook to grant him residence. The claimant was indeed able to provide the Commission with the concrete evidence of having been tortured once repatriated (See, European Commission of Human Rights, 'Regrets of the Swedish Government for expelling an applicant to Jordan under the risk of torture in non-respect of a Rule 36 indication/friendly settlement in the case of Mansi v. Sweden', Report of 9 March 1990, 12 Human Rights Law Journal 170 (1991).
104. Ahmed v. Austria, Judgment of 17 Dec. 1996: 24 European Human Rights Reports 278 (1997); 2 IJRL 279 (1997).
105. See also the judgment in Chahal v. the United Kingdom, above note 84. The Court, taking account of the deterioration of the human rights situation in the Indian province of Punjab, found a violation of art. 3 in the event of a decision to deport to India of a Sikh separatist being implemented. See Mole, N., 'Immigration and Freedom of Movement', in Harris, D. and Joseph. S., eds., The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and United Kingdom Law, Oxford, (1995), 297, 324.
106. The Committee has dealt with art. 7 ICCPR66 in several extradition cases; see above, note 81.
107. 'General Comment 15' (1986): 41 UN GAOR, Suppl. No. 40, (UN doc. A/41/40), annex VI, para. 5.
108. See above note 53, para. 9.
109. Mutombo v. Switzerland, Communication No. 13/1993, 27 Apr. 1994: 15 Human Rights Law Journal 164 (1994); 7 IJRL 322 (1995); Nowak, M., 'Committee against Torture News', 12 Netherlands Quarterly on Human Rights 251(1994).
110. Mutombo, §9.3.
111. Ibid., §§ 9.4, 9.5.
112. Communication No. 15/1994, 15 Nov. 1994: 15 Human Rights Law Journal 426 (1994); Nowak, M., 13 Netherlands Quarterly on Human Rights 154 (1995).
113. Communication No. 36/1995, 8 May 1996: UN doc. A/51/44 (1996), 76.
114. Communication No. 21/1995, 8 May 1996: UN doc. A/51/44 (1996), 68; 8 IJRL 440 (1996).
115. Communication No. 41/1996, 8 May 1996: UN doc. A/51/44 (1996), 81; 8 IJRL 651 (1996).
116. Communication No. 43/1996, 15 Nov. 1996: UN doc. CAT/C/17/D/43/1996.
117. See, for example, Comision Espanola de Ayuda al Refugiado v. Spain, Communication No. 23/1995, 15 Nov. 1995: UN doc. A/51/44 (1996), 55; Mr. X and Mrs. Y v. The Netherlands, Communication No. 31/1995, 20 Nov. 1995: UN doc. A/51/44 (1996), 62.
118. See for instance M.A. v. Canada, Communication No. 22/1995, and A.E. v. Switzerland, Communication No. 32/1995: UN doc. A/50/44 (1995), 73, 74; N.D. v. France, Communication No. 32/1995, and K.K.H. v. Canada, Communication No. 35/1995: UN doc. A/51/44 (1996), 64, 66.
119. See further Blay, S. and Zimmermann, A., 'Recent Changes in German Refugee Law: A Critical Assessment', 88 AJIL 363 (1994).
120. On this issue, see generally Hailbronner, K., 'The Concept of "Safe Country" and Expeditious Asylum Procedures: A Western European Perspective', 5 IJRL 31 (1993); Kjaergaard, E., 'The Concept of "Safe Third Country" in Contemporary European Refugee Law', 6 IJRL 649 (1994); Achermann, A. and Gattiker, M., 'Safe Third Countries: European Developments', 7 IJRL 19 (1995).
121. On this issue, see generally Hailbronner, K., 'The Concept of "Safe Country" and Expeditious Asylum Procedures: A Western European Perspective', 5 IJRL 31 (1993); Kjaergaard, E., 'The Concept of "Safe Third Country" in Contemporary European Refugee Law', 6 IJRL 649 (1994); Achermann, A. and Gattiker, M., 'Safe Third Countries: European Developments', 7 IJRL 19 (1995).
122. On this issue, see generally Hailbronner, K., 'The Concept of "Safe Country" and Expeditious Asylum Procedures: A Western European Perspective', 5 IJRL 31 (1993); Kjaergaard, E., 'The Concept of "Safe Third Country" in Contemporary European Refugee Law', 6 IJRL 649 (1994); Achermann, A. and Gattiker, M., 'Safe Third Countries: European Developments', 7 IJRL 19 (1995).
123. On article 16a of the German Basic Law, see Zimmermann, A., 'Asylum Law in the Federal Republic of Germany in the Context of International Law', 53 Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 49 (1993); Federal Ministry of the Interior, 'Recent Developments in the German Law on Asylum and Aliens', 6 IJRL 265 (1994).
124. On article 16a of the German Basic Law, see Zimmermann, A., 'Asylum Law in the Federal Republic of Germany in the Context of International Law', 53 Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 49 (1993); Federal Ministry of the Interior, 'Recent Developments in the German Law on Asylum and Aliens', 6 IJRL 265 (1994).
125. For comment, see Fassbcnder, B., 91 AJIL 355 (1997); Marx, R. and Lumpp, K., 'The German Constitutional Court's Decision of 14 May 1996 on the Concept of "Safe Third Countries" - A Basis for Burden-Sharing in Europe?', 8 IJRL 419 (1996).
126. For text of judgment, see 77 Rivista di Diritto Internazionale 531 (1994). For the extensive jurisprudence at national level, see www.unhcr.ch/refworld/legal/refcas, including also decision of the Belgian 'Commission Permanente de Recours des Réfugiés', 8 Nov. 1990: 61 Revue du Droit des Etrangers 360 (1990); Syed Jubair c. Etat belge, decision No. 50.302 of the Brussels 'Tribunal de Première Instance', 18 Feb. 1991; decision of the Brussels 'Tribunal Civil', 30 Oct. 1991: 65 Revue du Droit des Etrangers 376 (1991); judgment of the Liege 'Cour d'Appel', 11 Mar. 1992: 68 Revue du Droit des Etrangers 108 (1992); decision of the Sigmaringen 'Verwaltungsgericht', 17 Feb. 1994: 5 InfAusIR 209 (1994); decision of the Göttingen 'Verwaltungsgericht', 24 Mar. 1994; A.A. v. De Staat der Nederlanden, judgment of the The Hague 'Arrondissementsrechtbank', 7 Aug. 1990: 6 Nieuwsbrief Asiel-en Vluchtelingenrecht 337 (1990); A. Hosseizadek v. De Staatssecretaris van Justitie, judgment of the Dutch 'Raad van State', 4 Sept. 1992; Bundesamt für Polizeiwesen v. Balint Landowski, judgment of the Swiss 'Bundesgericht', 18 Dec. 1990; Sabri Akdag v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, United Kingdom Court of Appeal, 21 Oct. 1991: Imm. AR (1993), 172.
127. See further www.unhcr.ch/refworld/legal/refcas.
128. On female genital mutilation in general, see Lightfoot-Klein, H., Prisoners of Ritual: An Odyssey into Female Genital Circumcision in Africa, New York, Harrington Park Press, 1989; Toubia, N., Female Genital Mutilation: A Call for Global Action, New York, Women Ink., 1993; Hosken, F.P., The Hosken Report: Genital and Sexual Mutilation of Females, New York, Women's International Network News, 1993; Dorkenoo, E., Cutting the Rose. Female Genital Mutilation: The Practice and Its Prevention, London, Minority Rights Group, 1994. On FGM in connection with refugee status determination, see Kelly, N., 'Gender-Related Persecution: Assessing the Asylum Claims of Women', 26 Cornell International Law Journal 625 (1993); Passade Cissé, B., 'International Law Sources Applicable to Female Genital Mutilation: A Guide to Adjudicators of Refugee Claims Based on a Fear of Female Genital Mutilation', 35 Columbia J. of Transnational Law 429 (1997); 'UNHCR Symposium on Gender-Based Persecution, 22-23 February 1996', International Journal of Refugee Law, Special Issue (Autumn 1997); Crawley, H., Women as Asylum Seekers: A Legal Handbook, London, ILPA, 1997.
129. On female genital mutilation in general, see Lightfoot-Klein, H., Prisoners of Ritual: An Odyssey into Female Genital Circumcision in Africa, New York, Harrington Park Press, 1989; Toubia, N., Female Genital Mutilation: A Call for Global Action, New York, Women Ink., 1993; Hosken, F.P., The Hosken Report: Genital and Sexual Mutilation of Females, New York, Women's International Network News, 1993; Dorkenoo, E., Cutting the Rose. Female Genital Mutilation: The Practice and Its Prevention, London, Minority Rights Group, 1994. On FGM in connection with refugee status determination, see Kelly, N., 'Gender-Related Persecution: Assessing the Asylum Claims of Women', 26 Cornell International Law Journal 625 (1993); Passade Cissé, B., 'International Law Sources Applicable to Female Genital Mutilation: A Guide to Adjudicators of Refugee Claims Based on a Fear of Female Genital Mutilation', 35 Columbia J. of Transnational Law 429 (1997); 'UNHCR Symposium on Gender-Based Persecution, 22-23 February 1996', International Journal of Refugee Law, Special Issue (Autumn 1997); Crawley, H., Women as Asylum Seekers: A Legal Handbook, London, ILPA, 1997.
130. On female genital mutilation in general, see Lightfoot-Klein, H., Prisoners of Ritual: An Odyssey into Female Genital Circumcision in Africa, New York, Harrington Park Press, 1989; Toubia, N., Female Genital Mutilation: A Call for Global Action, New York, Women Ink., 1993; Hosken, F.P., The Hosken Report: Genital and Sexual Mutilation of Females, New York, Women's International Network News, 1993; Dorkenoo, E., Cutting the Rose. Female Genital Mutilation: The Practice and Its Prevention, London, Minority Rights Group, 1994. On FGM in connection with refugee status determination, see Kelly, N., 'Gender-Related Persecution: Assessing the Asylum Claims of Women', 26 Cornell International Law Journal 625 (1993); Passade Cissé, B., 'International Law Sources Applicable to Female Genital Mutilation: A Guide to Adjudicators of Refugee Claims Based on a Fear of Female Genital Mutilation', 35 Columbia J. of Transnational Law 429 (1997); 'UNHCR Symposium on Gender-Based Persecution, 22-23 February 1996', International Journal of Refugee Law, Special Issue (Autumn 1997); Crawley, H., Women as Asylum Seekers: A Legal Handbook, London, ILPA, 1997.
131. On female genital mutilation in general, see Lightfoot-Klein, H., Prisoners of Ritual: An Odyssey into Female Genital Circumcision in Africa, New York, Harrington Park Press, 1989; Toubia, N., Female Genital Mutilation: A Call for Global Action, New York, Women Ink., 1993; Hosken, F.P., The Hosken Report: Genital and Sexual Mutilation of Females, New York, Women's International Network News, 1993; Dorkenoo, E., Cutting the Rose. Female Genital Mutilation: The Practice and Its Prevention, London, Minority Rights Group, 1994. On FGM in connection with refugee status determination, see Kelly, N., 'Gender-Related Persecution: Assessing the Asylum Claims of Women', 26 Cornell International Law Journal 625 (1993); Passade Cissé, B., 'International Law Sources Applicable to Female Genital Mutilation: A Guide to Adjudicators of Refugee Claims Based on a Fear of Female Genital Mutilation', 35 Columbia J. of Transnational Law 429 (1997); 'UNHCR Symposium on Gender-Based Persecution, 22-23 February 1996', International Journal of Refugee Law, Special Issue (Autumn 1997); Crawley, H., Women as Asylum Seekers: A Legal Handbook, London, ILPA, 1997.
132. On female genital mutilation in general, see Lightfoot-Klein, H., Prisoners of Ritual: An Odyssey into Female Genital Circumcision in Africa, New York, Harrington Park Press, 1989; Toubia, N., Female Genital Mutilation: A Call for Global Action, New York, Women Ink., 1993; Hosken, F.P., The Hosken Report: Genital and Sexual Mutilation of Females, New York, Women's International Network News, 1993; Dorkenoo, E., Cutting the Rose. Female Genital Mutilation: The Practice and Its Prevention, London, Minority Rights Group, 1994. On FGM in connection with refugee status determination, see Kelly, N., 'Gender-Related Persecution: Assessing the Asylum Claims of Women', 26 Cornell International Law Journal 625 (1993); Passade Cissé, B., 'International Law Sources Applicable to Female Genital Mutilation: A Guide to Adjudicators of Refugee Claims Based on a Fear of Female Genital Mutilation', 35 Columbia J. of Transnational Law 429 (1997); 'UNHCR Symposium on Gender-Based Persecution, 22-23 February 1996', International Journal of Refugee Law, Special Issue (Autumn 1997); Crawley, H., Women as Asylum Seekers: A Legal Handbook, London, ILPA, 1997.
133. On female genital mutilation in general, see Lightfoot-Klein, H., Prisoners of Ritual: An Odyssey into Female Genital Circumcision in Africa, New York, Harrington Park Press, 1989; Toubia, N., Female Genital Mutilation: A Call for Global Action, New York, Women Ink., 1993; Hosken, F.P., The Hosken Report: Genital and Sexual Mutilation of Females, New York, Women's International Network News, 1993; Dorkenoo, E., Cutting the Rose. Female Genital Mutilation: The Practice and Its Prevention, London, Minority Rights Group, 1994. On FGM in connection with refugee status determination, see Kelly, N., 'Gender-Related Persecution: Assessing the Asylum Claims of Women', 26 Cornell International Law Journal 625 (1993); Passade Cissé, B., 'International Law Sources Applicable to Female Genital Mutilation: A Guide to Adjudicators of Refugee Claims Based on a Fear of Female Genital Mutilation', 35 Columbia J. of Transnational Law 429 (1997); 'UNHCR Symposium on Gender-Based Persecution, 22-23 February 1996', International Journal of Refugee Law, Special Issue (Autumn 1997); Crawley, H., Women as Asylum Seekers: A Legal Handbook, London, ILPA, 1997.
134. On female genital mutilation in general, see Lightfoot-Klein, H., Prisoners of Ritual: An Odyssey into Female Genital Circumcision in Africa, New York, Harrington Park Press, 1989; Toubia, N., Female Genital Mutilation: A Call for Global Action, New York, Women Ink., 1993; Hosken, F.P., The Hosken Report: Genital and Sexual Mutilation of Females, New York, Women's International Network News, 1993; Dorkenoo, E., Cutting the Rose. Female Genital Mutilation: The Practice and Its Prevention, London, Minority Rights Group, 1994. On FGM in connection with refugee status determination, see Kelly, N., 'Gender-Related Persecution: Assessing the Asylum Claims of Women', 26 Cornell International Law Journal 625 (1993); Passade Cissé, B., 'International Law Sources Applicable to Female Genital Mutilation: A Guide to Adjudicators of Refugee Claims Based on a Fear of Female Genital Mutilation', 35 Columbia J. of Transnational Law 429 (1997); 'UNHCR Symposium on Gender-Based Persecution, 22-23 February 1996', International Journal of Refugee Law, Special Issue (Autumn 1997); Crawley, H., Women as Asylum Seekers: A Legal Handbook, London, ILPA, 1997.
135. On female genital mutilation in general, see Lightfoot-Klein, H., Prisoners of Ritual: An Odyssey into Female Genital Circumcision in Africa, New York, Harrington Park Press, 1989; Toubia, N., Female Genital Mutilation: A Call for Global Action, New York, Women Ink., 1993; Hosken, F.P., The Hosken Report: Genital and Sexual Mutilation of Females, New York, Women's International Network News, 1993; Dorkenoo, E., Cutting the Rose. Female Genital Mutilation: The Practice and Its Prevention, London, Minority Rights Group, 1994. On FGM in connection with refugee status determination, see Kelly, N., 'Gender-Related Persecution: Assessing the Asylum Claims of Women', 26 Cornell International Law Journal 625 (1993); Passade Cissé, B., 'International Law Sources Applicable to Female Genital Mutilation: A Guide to Adjudicators of Refugee Claims Based on a Fear of Female Genital Mutilation', 35 Columbia J. of Transnational Law 429 (1997); 'UNHCR Symposium on Gender-Based Persecution, 22-23 February 1996', International Journal of Refugee Law, Special Issue (Autumn 1997); Crawley, H., Women as Asylum Seekers: A Legal Handbook, London, ILPA, 1997.
136. See, among others, the decisions of the Immigration and Refugee Board Convention Refugee Determination Division (Toronto, Canada) of 1994, excerpted in 6 IJRL 662 (1994); the 'Tribunal Administratif de Lyon' (France), 12 Jun. 1996: 7 Revue Trimestrielle des Droits de l'Homme 695 (1996); United States Board of Immigration Appeals in Kasinga, 13 Jun. 1996, in IJRL Special Issue (Autumn 1997), 213 (for comment see Malone, L.A. and Wood, G., 91 AJIL 140 (1997)). Canada was the first country to make FGM grounds for granting refugee status: indeed, already in 1993, the Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board adopted 'Guidelines on Women Refugee Claimants Fearing Gender-Related Persecution'. For text, see 5 IJRL 240 (1993); on the impact of the Guidelines see Bernier, C., 'The IRB Guidelines on Women Refugee Claimants Fearing Gender-Related Persecution', IJRL Special Issue (Autumn 1997), 167.
137. See, among others, the decisions of the Immigration and Refugee Board Convention Refugee Determination Division (Toronto, Canada) of 1994, excerpted in 6 IJRL 662 (1994); the 'Tribunal Administratif de Lyon' (France), 12 Jun. 1996: 7 Revue Trimestrielle des Droits de l'Homme 695 (1996); United States Board of Immigration Appeals in Kasinga, 13 Jun. 1996, in IJRL Special Issue (Autumn 1997), 213 (for comment see Malone, L.A. and Wood, G., 91 AJIL 140 (1997)). Canada was the first country to make FGM grounds for granting refugee status: indeed, already in 1993, the Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board adopted 'Guidelines on Women Refugee Claimants Fearing Gender-Related Persecution'. For text, see 5 IJRL 240 (1993); on the impact of the Guidelines see Bernier, C., 'The IRB Guidelines on Women Refugee Claimants Fearing Gender-Related Persecution', IJRL Special Issue (Autumn 1997), 167.
138. See, among others, the decisions of the Immigration and Refugee Board Convention Refugee Determination Division (Toronto, Canada) of 1994, excerpted in 6 IJRL 662 (1994); the 'Tribunal Administratif de Lyon' (France), 12 Jun. 1996: 7 Revue Trimestrielle des Droits de l'Homme 695 (1996); United States Board of Immigration Appeals in Kasinga, 13 Jun. 1996, in IJRL Special Issue (Autumn 1997), 213 (for comment see Malone, L.A. and Wood, G., 91 AJIL 140 (1997)). Canada was the first country to make FGM grounds for granting refugee status: indeed, already in 1993, the Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board adopted 'Guidelines on Women Refugee Claimants Fearing Gender-Related Persecution'. For text, see 5 IJRL 240 (1993); on the impact of the Guidelines see Bernier, C., 'The IRB Guidelines on Women Refugee Claimants Fearing Gender-Related Persecution', IJRL Special Issue (Autumn 1997), 167.
139. See, among others, the decisions of the Immigration and Refugee Board Convention Refugee Determination Division (Toronto, Canada) of 1994, excerpted in 6 IJRL 662 (1994); the 'Tribunal Administratif de Lyon' (France), 12 Jun. 1996: 7 Revue Trimestrielle des Droits de l'Homme 695 (1996); United States Board of Immigration Appeals in Kasinga, 13 Jun. 1996, in IJRL Special Issue (Autumn 1997), 213 (for comment see Malone, L.A. and Wood, G., 91 AJIL 140 (1997)). Canada was the first country to make FGM grounds for granting refugee status: indeed, already in 1993, the Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board adopted 'Guidelines on Women Refugee Claimants Fearing Gender-Related Persecution'. For text, see 5 IJRL 240 (1993); on the impact of the Guidelines see Bernier, C., 'The IRB Guidelines on Women Refugee Claimants Fearing Gender-Related Persecution', IJRL Special Issue (Autumn 1997), 167.
140. See, among others, the decisions of the Immigration and Refugee Board Convention Refugee Determination Division (Toronto, Canada) of 1994, excerpted in 6 IJRL 662 (1994); the 'Tribunal Administratif de Lyon' (France), 12 Jun. 1996: 7 Revue Trimestrielle des Droits de l'Homme 695 (1996); United States Board of Immigration Appeals in Kasinga, 13 Jun. 1996, in IJRL Special Issue (Autumn 1997), 213 (for comment see Malone, L.A. and Wood, G., 91 AJIL 140 (1997)). Canada was the first country to make FGM grounds for granting refugee status: indeed, already in 1993, the Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board adopted 'Guidelines on Women Refugee Claimants Fearing Gender-Related Persecution'. For text, see 5 IJRL 240 (1993); on the impact of the Guidelines see Bernier, C., 'The IRB Guidelines on Women Refugee Claimants Fearing Gender-Related Persecution', IJRL Special Issue (Autumn 1997), 167.
141. See above note 52, 13, para. 49. See also UNGA res. 52/99, 'Traditional or customary practices affecting the health of women and girls', 12 Dec. 1997; the various forms of violence against women identified in the 1993 UN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women: UNGA res. 48/104, 20 Dec. 1993, art. 2 of which states 'Violence against women shall be understood to encompass, but not be limited to, the following: a) Physical, sexual and psychological violence occurring in the family, including battering, sexual abuse of female children in the household, dowry-related violence, marital rape, female genital mutilation and other traditional practices harmful to women, non-spousal violence and violence related to exploitation . . . ' In addition, art. 4 urges States to condemn violence against women and not to 'invoke any custom, tradition or religious consideration to avoid their obligations with respect to its elimination'. And see the 1995 Report on the Beijing Conference on Women: UN doc. A/CONF.177/20, 17 Oct. 1995; the definition and examples of violence against women in para. 113 are very similar to those of the 1993 UN Declaration. Moreover, art. 1 of the 1994 Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence against women should be interpreted as implying genital mutilation when defining violence against women as 'any act or conduct, based on gender, which causes death or physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, whether in the public or the private sphere': OAS/Ser. L.V/II.92, doc. 31 rev. 3, 3 May 1996. Given the efforts of the United Nations in this domain, the judgment of the Egyptian Council of State (Supreme Administrative Court) forbidding FGM in public and private medical institutions is welcome: Corriere della Sera, 29 Dec. 1997, 6; La Repubblica, 29 Dec. 1997, 10.
142. 1993 2 FC 314; Case Abstract, 6 IJRL 119 (1994).
143. th) 264 (1995), and the Federal Court of Australia in Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v. A and B (1995) 130 ALR 40, quoted by UNHCR Division of International Protection, 'Gender-Related Persecution: An Analysis of Recent Trends', in IJRL Special Issue (Autumn 1997), 101, 107 . A favourable decision was given by Federal Judge of Eastern District of Virginia in 1994 in Guo Chun Di, quoted by Bresnick, R.O., 'Reproductive Ability as a Sixth Ground of Persecution under the Domestic and International Definitions of Refugee', 21 Syracuse J. of Int'l Law & Commerce 141 (1995), Case Abstract 6. In addition, see www.unhcr.ch/refworld/legal/refcas.
144. th) 264 (1995), and the Federal Court of Australia in Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v. A and B (1995) 130 ALR 40, quoted by UNHCR Division of International Protection, 'Gender-Related Persecution: An Analysis of Recent Trends', in IJRL Special Issue (Autumn 1997), 101, 107 . A favourable decision was given by Federal Judge of Eastern District of Virginia in 1994 in Guo Chun Di, quoted by Bresnick, R.O., 'Reproductive Ability as a Sixth Ground of Persecution under the Domestic and International Definitions of Refugee', 21 Syracuse J. of Int'l Law & Commerce 141 (1995), Case Abstract 6. In addition, see www.unhcr.ch/refworld/legal/refcas.
145. th) 264 (1995), and the Federal Court of Australia in Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v. A and B (1995) 130 ALR 40, quoted by UNHCR Division of International Protection, 'Gender-Related Persecution: An Analysis of Recent Trends', in IJRL Special Issue (Autumn 1997), 101, 107 . A favourable decision was given by Federal Judge of Eastern District of Virginia in 1994 in Guo Chun Di, quoted by Bresnick, R.O., 'Reproductive Ability as a Sixth Ground of Persecution under the Domestic and International Definitions of Refugee', 21 Syracuse J. of Int'l Law & Commerce 141 (1995), Case Abstract 6. In addition, see www.unhcr.ch/refworld/legal/refcas.
146. See, on this argument, Bresnick, above note 111; Lin, S.M., Note, 'China's One-Couple, One-Child Family Planning Policy as Grounds for Granting Asylum', 36 Harv. Int'l Law J. 231 (1995); Zhang, G., 'U.S. Asylum Policy and Population Control in the People's Republic of China', 18 Houston J. Int'l Law 557 (1996).
147. See, on this argument, Bresnick, above note 111; Lin, S.M., Note, 'China's One-Couple, One-Child Family Planning Policy as Grounds for Granting Asylum', 36 Harv. Int'l Law J. 231 (1995); Zhang, G., 'U.S. Asylum Policy and Population Control in the People's Republic of China', 18 Houston J. Int'l Law 557 (1996).
148. See, on this argument, Bresnick, above note 111; Lin, S.M., Note, 'China's One-Couple, One-Child Family Planning Policy as Grounds for Granting Asylum', 36 Harv. Int'l Law J. 231 (1995); Zhang, G., 'U.S. Asylum Policy and Population Control in the People's Republic of China', 18 Houston J. Int'l Law 557 (1996).
149. See also Mole, above note 87, 301.
150. See 'Status of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Reservations, Declaration and Objections under the Convention': UN doc. CAT/C/2/Rev. 4, 8 Feb. 1996.
151. By 1 Jan. 1998, the Convention had been ratified by 103 States.
152. On this question, in general, see Sayeh, L.P. and Morse, A.M., 'Islam and the Treatment of Women: An Incomplete Understanding of Gradualism', 30 Texas Int'l Law J. 325 (1995). For examples of domestic judgments granting refugee status to women threatened with marriage against their will, see UNHCR Division of International Protection, above note 111, 92.
153. Application No. 19465/92: 21 European Human Rights Reports 468 (1996), paras. 61, 62. See also Velita Flores v. Sweden, Application No. 28392/95, in 20 European Human Rights Reports (1995), CD 134.
154. Ibid., 477.
155. Judgment of 2 May 1997 on Application No. 30240/96: 24 European Human Rights Reports 423 (1997). See also the decision of the Commission and the dissenting opinion of First Chamber, in 22 European Human Rights Reports, Commission Suppl., (1996), respectively at CD45 and CD112.
156. See Andrysek, above note 79, 392.
157. See above, note 91.
158. See above, note 84.
159. Presumably, the Egyptian ban on FGM (see above, note 109) was the result of the extensive work carried out by the United Nations on traditional practices affecting the health of women and children and not of the acceptance of FGM as new ground for granting refugee status. Indeed, it is certainly not accidental that the Egypt's Supreme Administrative Court Judgment was delivered just a few days after the adoption of UNGA res. 52/99, above, note 109.
160. It has been reported that since Canada became the first country to make FGM grounds for granting refugee status in 1993 (see above, note 108), only a small number of women have sought protection on those grounds: 'Report of the UNHCR Symposium on Gender-Based Persecution', in IJRL Special Issue (Autumn 1997) 30; and that the same happened in the United States after the INS issued similar guidelines: see 7 IJRL 700 (1995). Given that genital mutilation usually occurs when women are too young to escape, it is doubtful that those old enough to flee are always aware of the new prospects explained in the guidelines.
161. Velita Flores v. Sweden, Application 28392/95: 20 European Human Rights Reports (1995) CD134.
162. See above, note 117.
163. See above, note 119.