Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-8zxtt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-14T05:42:59.980Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The Principle of Non-Refoulement under the ECHR and the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Eman Hamdan Brill/Nijhoff, 2016, 404 pp, €165, ISBN 9789004319387

Review products

The Principle of Non-Refoulement under the ECHR and the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment Eman Hamdan Brill/Nijhoff, 2016, 404 pp, €165, ISBN 9789004319387

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2017

Nicole Bürli*
Affiliation:
Human Rights Adviser, World Organisation against Torture18nb@omct.org
Get access

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Review
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and The Faculty of Law, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (entered into force 26 June 1987) 1465 UNTS 85 (Convention against Torture).

2 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (entered into force 3 September 1953) 213 UNTS 222 (ECHR).

3 Convention against Torture (n 1) arts 1, 3.

4 ComAT, General Comment No 2 (24 January 2008), UN Doc CAT/C/GC/2, para 6.

5 ibid.

6 ComAT, Concluding Observations on the Syrian Arab Republic (25 May 2010), UN Doc CAT/C/SYR/CO/1, para 18.

7 ComAT, Concluding Observations on the Second Periodic Report of Togo (11 December 2012), UN Doc CAT/C/TGO/CO/2, para 16.

8 See, eg, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, ‘Urgent Need to Deal with New Failures to Co-operate with the European Court of Human Rights’, 28 February 2014, Doc No 13435.

9 ECHR (n 2) art 34; Convention against Torture (n 1) art 22.

10 ComAT, Agiza v Sweden, Communication No 233/2003 (24 May 2005), UN Doc CAT/C/34/D/233/2003.

11 See, eg, Forowicz, Magdalena, The Reception of International Law in the European Court of Human Rights (Oxford University Press 2010) 190ffCrossRefGoogle Scholar, which provides a thorough analysis of the perception of the ComAT in the ECtHR case law.

12 Depending on the responding state, a decision is reached in under three years or in more than five years: see, eg, ECtHR Public Relations Unit, ‘The ECHR in 50 Questions’, February 2014, http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/50Questions_ENG.pdf.

13 ComAT, Sogi v Canada, Communication No 297/2006 (29 November 2007), UN Doc CAT/C/39/D/297/2006, para 12.

14 ComAT, Kalinichenko v Morocco, Communication No 428/2010 (18 January 2012), UN Doc CAT/C/47/D/428/2010, para 17.

15 ibid.

16 Convention against Torture (n 1) art 14.

17 For state parties’ obligations under art 14 see ComAT, General Comment No 3 (19 November 2012), UN Doc CAT/C/GC/3.

18 All views are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views of the World Organization against Torture.