Prohibition on Torture and Other Ill-treatment
Prohibition on Torture and Other Ill-treatment
The case law of the Strasbourg bodies referring to the Convention Against Torture has followed an even, albeit curious development. This chapter analyses the Courts' and the Commission approach to the distinction between torture and other ill-treatment, a notion which remains unclear in international law. The Commission initially indicated that it would follow a purpose-oriented, whereas the Court opted for an approach based on the severity of pain requirement. In the recent times, the Court seems to have focused on a mixture of these approaches. The chapter further discusses the co-existence between the ECtHR and the Committee Against Torture. This aspect was largely unproblematic until now, in part, because it has been scarce and, in part, due to a coherent legislative set up. Finally, a survey of the case law reveals that, in spite of a lack of explicit references to the case of the Committee, there is an important convergence between their respective decisions.
Keywords: purpose, severity of treatment, Committee Against Torture, The Greek Case, Special Rapporteur, torture
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .
