The Prohibition of Torture and Ill-treatment in the African Human Rights System: A HANDBOOK FOR VICTIMS AND THEIR ADVOCATES to emergency situations’.471 Thus, ‘even a situation of [….] war [….] cannot be cited as justification for the violation by the State or its authority to violate the African Charter’.472 In implementing the rights contained in it, moreover, the Charter enjoins States Parties ‘to secure the rights protected in the Charter to all persons within their jurisdiction, nationals or non-nationals’.473 11. Methods of Interpretation The Charter allows the African Commission to ‘draw inspiration from international law on human and peoples’ rights’, including other international instruments to which African States are parties.474 The Charter further authorises the Commission to ‘take into consideration as subsidiary measures to determine the principles of law’475 other general or special international conventions, customs generally accepted as law, general principles of law recognized by African States, legal precedents and doctrine,476 as well as African practices consistent with international norms on human and peoples’ rights.477 On a number of occasions, case law has highlighted the need to interpret provisions ‘holistically’,478 and in a manner that is ‘responsive to African circumstances’.479 A golden thread in the early case law is the interpretation of rights in favorem libertatis, in favour of the individual and human rights, or ‘generously’.480 The Commission explained in Curtis Francis Doebbler v. Sudan, that:481 While ultimately whether an act constitutes inhuman or degrading treatment depends on the circumstances of the case, the Commission has stated that the prohibition of torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is to be interpreted as widely as possible to encompass the widest possible array of physical and mental abuse. 471 ACHPR, Commission Nationale des Droits de l’Homme et des Libertés v. Chad, Comm. No. 74/92; Malawi Africa Association and Others v. Mauritania, Comm. Nos. 54/91, 61/91, 98/93, 164-169/97, 210/98, para. 84. 472 Ibid. 473 ACHPR, Rencontre Africaine pour la Defense des Droits de l’Homme (RADDHO) v. Zambia, Comm. No. 71/92. 474 African Charter, supra note 9, Article 60. 475 Ibid., Article 61. 476 This would include, for instance, the Conclusions of the Executive Committee of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. 477 Ibid. 478 Also in accordance with art. 31(1) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, entered into force 27 January 1980, UN Doc. A/Conf.39/27 (23 May 1969), 1155 U.N.T.S. p. 331, 8 ILM 679; see also, ACHPR, Legal Resources Foundation v. Zambia, Comm. No. 211/98, 29th Ordinary Session (7 May 2001), para. 70: “The Charter must be interpreted holistically and all clauses must reinforce each other”. 479 ACHPR, SERAC and Another v. Nigeria, Comm. No. 155/96, para. 68. 480 See, e.g., ACHPR, Huri-Laws v. Nigeria, Comm. No. 225/98; ACHPR, Amnesty International and Others v. Sudan, Comm. Nos. 48/90, 50/91, 52/91, 89/93, para. 80: “Any restriction of rights should be the exception.” 481 ACHPR, Curtis Francis Doebbler v. Sudan, Comm. No. 236/00, paras. 49-50; see also, ACHPR, Media Rights Agenda (on behalf of Niran Malaolu) v. Nigeria, Comm. No. 224/98; ACHPR, Huri-Laws v. Nigeria, Comm. No. 225/98. 110