treaties in which the prohibition against torture is enshrined. Many governments, human
rights experts, and legal scholars have also affirmed that the prohibition against
refoulement, derivative of the absolute ban on torture and from which no derogation is
permitted, shares its jus cogens character.22 The U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture has
stated that “The principle of non-refoulement is an inherent part of the overall absolute
and imperative nature of the prohibition of torture and other forms of ill-treatment.” 23
The norm against torture, moreover, is undoubtedly one of the “basic rights of the
human person” that partake of an erga omnes character, that is, it is one in which all states
have a legal interest in ensuring its protection.24 The erga omnes character of the norm
signals that states have a right to pursue remedies for its violation collectively as well as
individually. Torture is a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions, which require states
parties to “search for” persons committing such crimes regardless of their nationality
and bring them to justice in their own courts.25 It is moreover a crime of universal
jurisdiction, and can also constitute a crime against humanity or a war crime under the
jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. 26 Implicit in such a general right of
enforcement and remedy on the part of the whole international community is the
principle that states also have an obligation not to facilitate violations, either by their
22
See, Elihu Lauterpacht and Daniel Bethlehem, “The Scope and Content of the Principle of Non-refoulement,”
June 20, 2001 [online] http://www.unhcr.ch/cgibin/texis/vtx/home/+lwwBmeDyXM_wwwwxwwwwwwwhFqA72ZR0gRfZNtFqrpGdBnqBAFqA72ZR0gRfZNcFqe
wlQtDaZpoDodDadDaBrnaIqdpnawDmagdDBnDBadhaBrna7GoDqopcnadhaNdDe2Rqxhd1cnMnDBaDzmxww
wwwww/opendoc.pdf; Rene Bruin and Kees Wouters, “Terrorism and the Non-Derogability of NonRefoulement,” International Journal of Refugee Law, Volume 15 No. 5 (2003), section 4.6 [The jus cogens
nature of nonrefoulement]; Jean Allain, “The Jus Cogens Nature of Nonrefoulement,” International Journal of
Refugee Law, Vol. 13 (2001), p. 538; David Weissbrodt and Isabel Hörtreitere, “The Principle of Nonrefoulement: Article 3 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or
Punishment in Comparison with the Non-refoulement Provisions of Other International Human Rights Treaties,”
Buffalo Human Rights Law Review, Vol. 5 (1999).
23
Report of the Special Rapporteur on Torture Theo van Boven to the General Assembly, A/59/324, August 23,
2004, paras. 25-29, [online]
http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N04/498/52/PDF/N0449852.pdf?OpenElement (retrieved March 7,
2005).
24
Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited, Second Phase, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 1970, p.
32, para. 33. Although the Barcelona Traction case did not specifically enumerate torture, it is widely accepted
that the prohibition against torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment is a norm of such fundamental
importance and universal acceptance that it falls into this class of obligations, and moreover, is a crime of
universal jurisdiction. See, for example, Restatement of the Law (Third): The Foreign Relations Law of the
United States (The American Law Institute: Washington, D.C.) 1986 at § 702 Comment (o) and M. Cherif
Bassiouni, "International Crimes: Jus Cogens and Obligatio Erga Omnes," Law & Contemp. Prob., 25 (1996),
pp. 63, 68.
25
See, e.g. arts. 146 and 147 to the Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War.
Geneva, 12 August 1949. 6 U.S.T. 3516, 75 U.N.T.S. 287 [online]
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/0/6756482d86146898c125641e004aa3c5?OpenDocument (retrieved March 17,
2005).
26
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 1998, arts. 7(1)(f); 8(2)(ii); 8(2)(c)(i-ii); see also the
International Law Commission’s Draft Code of Crimes Against the Peace and Security of Mankind, at articles 8
and 9, 1996 [online] http://www.un.org/law/ilc/texts/dccomfra.htm (retrieved March 31, 2005). This foundational
document for the Rome Statute laid out torture as a crime of universal jurisdiction to which every state is obliged
to extend its criminal jurisdiction regardless of where or by whom the crime was committed
13
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH VOL. 17 NO. 4(D)
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents