Youth advocates in Manila demonstrate during the commemoration of the United Nation's International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, June 2004. EPA/EMPICS

Abolition – goodbye, cruel world

Torture was formally abolished in England by the 1689 Bill of Rights. The French and American Revolutions also outlawed torture. And the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution famously rules out forcing anyone to testify against him – or herself. However, none of these provisions apply outside the borders of the individual nations. In particular, they have not restrained the conduct of governments in wartime, where unlawful and brutal violence has been commonplace.

1864-1949: The Geneva Conventions

International regulation of war can be dated to 1864, when the Red Cross was founded and the first Geneva Convention agreed. This stated that wounded soldiers should be cared for regardless of nationality. The second Convention, agreed in 1906, extended the first to apply to naval casualties. The third and fourth, agreed in 1929 and 1949 respectively, broke new ground: the third Convention mandates humane treatment of prisoners of war, while the fourth covers the treatment of civilians caught up in hostilities. In both cases, the Conventions state that the people covered must at all times be treated 'humanely', and must not be subjected to violence or the threat of violence.

1948: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

The fourth Geneva Convention was part of a worldwide reaction against the barbarities of the Second World War and the Nazi regime. This period also saw the founding of the United Nations. In 1948, the United Nations adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), of which Article 5 reads: 'No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.'

1950: The European Convention on Human Rights

In 1950, the Council of Europe adopted the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), of which Article 3 (echoing the UDHR) reads: 'No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.' Unlike the UDHR, the ECHR allows for 'derogation' – opting out – in conditions of 'war or other public emergency threatening the life of the nation'. However, the right to derogate does not cover all the ECHR's provisions; in particular, there is no opt-out from Article 3.

1987: The Convention Against Torture

In 1987 the United Nations adopted a Convention Against Torture, prohibiting signatory states from inflicting 'severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental' for purposes such as interrogation, intimidation or extra-legal punishment. According to this Convention, 'no exceptional circumstances whatsoever' can justify torture. The Convention was ratified by Britain in 1988 and by the US in 1994. An additional protocol to the Convention, put forward in 2002, allows for international inspections of locations where torture may be carried out. The protocol has been ratified by Britain but not by the US.

When the Convention is taken together with the ECHR, which was incorporated into British law by the 1998 Human Rights Act, the legal position in Britain appears to leave no room for ambiguity: torture is illegal. In the US, by contrast, there is continuing debate on three key factors of the law on torture: the definition of torture; the authority to carry it out; and the legal status of victims of torture. It has been argued that stressful treatment which does not involve severe pain is not torture; that the commander-in-chief of a country's armed forces has the right to authorise torture in wartime; and that certain categories of people have forfeited the protection of international law, including prohibitions on torture and mistreatment. In some circumstances, apparently, torture is not torture.

Top