International Human Rights Law Assignment Sample

• Type Assignment
• Downloads1119
• Pages11

Introduction

Get free samples written by our Top-Notch subject experts for taking Assignment Help UK services.

This report attempts to assess how states of the United Nation are responding effectively to the United Nations Committee to oppose Torture concerns by an evaluation of the states within the authority of the United Nations. The results cast doubt on the Committee's ability to conduct Torture analysis. The document focuses on the Committee's prognosis and views on reports submitted largely by governments under observation (Nowak et al., 2021).

The United Nations Committee which is primarily instated to counter the Torture along with being in charge of overseeing governments' adherence under the respective obligations of the Declaration to deal with Torture and other numerous Cruel, Despicable, Insulting, and degrading treatment (also known as "the Convention"). The reporting method is the primary means by which the Commission exercises its responsibilities effectively of monitoring the allocated tasks (Oberg et al., 2021). All states participants in and through the Convention are obliged to disclose and submit to the United Nations Committee regularly, the reports must provide the assessment of how the persevered throughout the Convention are explicitly being implemented in their respective jurisdictions (Kadirova et al., 2021). States are required to present a preliminary investigation one year after the attainment of the convention, and another report after the next four years following the first year. As commented by the federal journals, the review of an assessment from the reports provided by the state's under a convention of the United Nations Committee can allow applying international condemnation (Holmström et al., 2021). 

If representatives of a governing authority are openly contemptuous of a state or declare their belief that perhaps the state has failed to deliver its duties under the convention, this would put measures in place on the government, especially when the deliberations are widely publicized worldwide or domestically.' The United Nations Committee can offer recommendations regarding states also on requirements required in connection to different concerns in their respective jurisdictions mostly through the assessed conclusion derived from the reports provided by states (Vik et al., 2021). This paper seeks to focus particularly on the subject of the United Nations Committee against Torture by an analysis of state answers to the Committee's final report. 

DISCUSSION 

The following study will focus on the states of the United Nations that were discussed by the Committee at least several times over through the range specified by United Nations Committee proceedings for the last decade. It is therefore made necessary for research that the reports of the states that have been selected for being assessed are selected twice since this conduct will provide some indicator of state advancement (Kadirova et al., 2021). Further assessment must also be acclaimed, however, while this survey provides some information on the impact of the Committee's findings, the assumption is not valid that any real progress achieved or made by states has been acclaimed as a consequence of the United Nations Committee's earlier proposals.

The criticism made on the states regarding the reports provided by the states gathered from other sources, including scholarly journalists, and commentators might have encouraged advancement. This is the study on the wealthy states of the United Nations, which have been primarily recognized as the means to put the Committee's findings into action. 

Norway, Netherlands, Portugal, and Sweden are the four states under the jurisdiction of the United Nations Committee (Dimitrijevi? et al., 2021).

Norway

In 2002, the United Nations Committee instated for dealing with Torture evaluated Norway's predicament against Torture and other Inhuman acts. Based on the reports provided by the state of Norway, the United Nations Committee applauded the federal authority for its high standard of human rights and fundamental freedoms in general, as well as its record of success in implementing the Conventions regulated by the United Nations Committee. The Committee observed with an appreciation for the adoption of an Initiative incorporated by the federal government for Human Rights, that comprises measures geared towards improving the regulation and implementation of the Committee's Convention. Regulations upon a right to health treatment for individuals confined in police custody, as well as the practice of providing the notice of imprisonment to families and attorneys before or just after arrest (Mujuzi et al., 2021). Recommendations are being made by the United Nations Committee to add a new clause to the Criminal Code prohibiting and punishing torture, as well as to change the Criminal Procedure Act to minimize the utilization of isolation imprisonment under the Penal Code and increase oversight of this practice from the administration of the justice (Kadirova et al., 2021).

The Committee, meanwhile, remained apprehensive about using the isolation imprisonment before the trial and requested that details gathered from the result of the request to alter the Criminal Procedure Act be provided in the next periodic report provided by the Norway state. The United Nations Committee also demanded that details on any efforts and initiatives adopted and implemented by Norway State to raise concerns about problems regarding the Torture and other Inhuman Act must be shared. Furthermore, it suggested that regulations and acts must be passed to alter the Legal Provisions to include the crime of torture, in compliance with the recommendation presented by the United Nations Committee. The Committee also demanded that its suggestions be extensively spread throughout Norway State in the relevant languages (Holmström et al., 2021).

Later the Norway state was considered for assessment by the United Nations Committee in 2007. 

The Norway state was praised once more for meeting its commitments mostly under Convention. The United Nations Committee praised the addition of a new section to the Penal Code prohibiting and punishing torture (Vik et al., 2021). The Criminal Procedure Act was revised to minimize the utilization of isolation detention and to increase congressional oversight of the practice. Furthermore, isolation detention as a punishment had also been discontinued. The Norway state was praised for the initiatives it adopted and enacted to ensure that somehow the United Nations Committee's concluding examination was instantly converted into a relevant Norwegian language and publicly reported (Nowak et al., 2021).

Netherlands

In the year 2000, the Netherlands State was investigated by the United Nations Committee opposing Torture. Based on the finding from the final outlook against torture, the United Nations Committee was pleased to learn that no complaints of mistreatment is been leveled against the Netherlands state (Vik et al., 2021). The State of the Netherlands incorporated a National War Criminals Investigation Team to assist in the investigation conducted on the prosecution of war crimes, including torture (Oberg et al., 2021). The United Nations Committee against Torture appreciated got the impression that among the three different parts of the Netherlands - the European part, the Netherlands Antilles, and Aruba, only the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba have adopted and enacted torture as a potential criminal violation under their criminal codes (Clapham et al., 2021). The Netherlands Antilles part of the Netherlands State had initiated a new Complaints Panel regarding the police offenses and violations, as well as a federal inquiry Agency to investigate complaints of public workers abusing their position (Holmström et al., 2021). 

The United Nations Committee against Torture, on the other hand, voiced worry over claims of police violence in Aruba. In the European part of the Netherlands, it was suggested that necessary measures must be implemented to reliably adopt and incorporate the Convention of the Committee into national legislation, along with the introduction of the elaboration of Torture specified in Article 1 of the United Nations Convention (Kadirova et al., 2021). Torture is elaborated within the United Nations Conventions as "the act and conduct through which catastrophic distress or injuries, regardless of whether physical or mental, is deliberately perpetrated on an individual under the motive of obtaining information or a testimony from the individual or the individual who co-participated in the offense, punishing an individual or an individual from a group of an offender who committed or is currently under the implication of having committed a crime, threatening or punishing the felony, or for other severe implications such as being punished due to discriminating factors, in such instances the pain or distress suffered by the individual is categorized as being intentional." In addition, the Committee also provides deliberate steps that must be enacted to enhance jail constraints in the Netherlands Antilles (Dimitrijevi? et al., 2021). (Dimitrijevi? et al., 2021). 

Following its review in 2007, the Committee responded positively to the Netherlands state's continuous attempts to prevent torture and ensure that individual liberties are not being subjected to torture or other inhuman conduct across three different parts of the Netherlands. According to the elaboration of the concept of torture in Article 1 of the United Nations Convention had been adopted further into the domestic federal law of the Netherlands' European region. The Aruba part of the Netherlands incorporated an Internal Investigations Bureau to gather and analyze allegations concerning the offenses and violations conducted by federal enforcement authorities. In the final outlook of the Netherlands Antilles, treatment of prisoners had improved due to the integration of the new regulations (Nowak et al., 2021).

Portugal

In the year 2000, Portugal was examined by the United Nations Committee for tackling Torture happening the police custody. The United Nations Committee recognized "the Portugal state continued attempts to ensure that its norms and policies adhere to the provisions of the United Nations Convention." The Convention commended a range of important achievements, including the intention to start a prison inspection system, the development of a system to simplify details about incidents of misuse of police power, and the adoption of legislation controlling police use of guns (Oberg et al., 2021). Guidelines had already been adopted addressing imprisonment arrangement and standards in police custody, as well as a system of periodic jail inspections by a civil officer to evaluate inmates' accusations about the treatment provided by the police authorities (Hagan et al., 2021). 

However, the United Nations Committee highlighted worry about ongoing allegations of fatalities and misconduct as a consequence of the interaction between the general public and law enforcement agencies (Vik et al., 2021). The United Nations Committee was also worried by allegations of cross-functional and cross aggression in prison. As a result, the Committee proposed that the Portugal State begin implementing disciplinary and educational initiatives to change the justice system to something that respects human rights. The Portugal state, especially, will have to guarantee that police investigations and prosecutions of police officers must be carried out as a preventative measure where evidence gathered will reveal the perpetrated torture or inhuman conduct by the police officials (Dimitrijevi? et al., 2021).

In 2007, Portugal was reconsidered once more. The United Nations Committee congratulated the Portugal state in its final outlook on the report provided by the Portugal state showing the progress in the preservation and respect for human rights since the examination of its last report of the law commission against torture and other inhuman conduct. The United Nations Committee applauded the enactment of a revised Penal Code as well as a new Criminal Procedure Code. The report also showed that Portugal state also incorporated an inspection system within the system of the Justice Services, as well as the adoption and enactment of the Police Code of Ethics (Holmström et al., 2021). Furthermore, laws had been adopted under which international individuals can never be transferred to their origin country where the individual will be in the danger of facing torture and other inhuman misconduct while being imprisoned. Portugal state appears to be recognized as being an example of a state in the United Nations that is reacting positively to the Committee facing the Torture recommendations. Among the several, United Nations Committee's major serious concerns related to the Portugal state was the police's lack of appreciation for human rights norms. Portugal appears to completely accept the Committee's proposals in this regard. It is worth noting that perhaps the United Nation Committee's 2007 consideration of the final outlook are significantly more extensive than the previous proposals, and also encompass topics such as family violence and forced labor (Clapham et al., 2021).

Sweden

In 2002, Sweden was examined by the United Nations Committee on the factor of dealing with torture and other inhuman conduct. Based on the final outlook of the report provided by Sweden, the United Nations Committee "stressed with an appreciation for Sweden's b, effective and consistent commitment to human rights and the constructive replies towards the Committee's former suggestions." According to the United Nations Commission's final perspective for 2002, the establishment of an independent council tasked with determining the processes that enforcement agencies should adopt during public protests to protect peace and order, as well as the right to demonstrate, was lauded (Clapham et al., 2021). The United Nations Committee also applauded the implementation of the strategy to sustain national human rights, comprising special protection from torture as one of the primary concerns (Vik et al., 2021). 

The United Nations Committee further raised doubts in its 2002 final outlook over reports that some foreign individuals were deported to countries with the foreign individuals had no b connection (Clapham et al., 2021). The Sweden state was encouraged to guarantee that under the instance where the foreign individuals were returned, the individuals were recommended to be returned to the nations where they belonged to and to countries where the individual will be safe from any serious cause to suppose they might get tortured in police custody (Oberg et al., 2021). Further, it has also been emphasized that the Special Control of Foreigners Act under the jurisdiction of the United Nation permitted foreign individuals suspected of terrorism must be deported via a mechanism that might have violated the United Nations Convention, due to no opportunity for appeal. The Sweden state is also encouraged to amend its laws to conform to the Convention of the United Nations (Holmström et al., 2021).

A special note had also been placed as an adjustment to the Aliens Act that introduces a b appeal mechanism and allowed for the provision of being a refugee to anyone alleging fear of deportation because of their gender or sexuality. New laws addressing core prisoner protections, including access to the courts and notices of incarceration, had also been enacted (Dimitrijevi? et al., 2021).

Overall, Sweden appears to already have adjusted pretty successfully to the United Nations Committee for facing and tackling the torture and other inhuman conduct happening in the police custody (Hagan et al., 2021). The Sweden state seems to be committed to adequately protecting human rights norms, especially the right to be protected from torture and inhuman misconduct, as recognized by the United Nations Committee. Yet, it can be acclaimed that the Sweden state does not always follow the Committee's conclusions. One lingering difficulty seems to be the Sweden state's refusal to adopt the violation act of torture, specifically outlined in the United Nations Convention, into the Swedens' domestic law (Holmström et al., 2021). 

Conclusion 

The United Nations Committee against Torture was also pleased to learn that Norway's state central department had been formed for the inquiry of suspected violations committed by police officers and that greater resources had been assigned for the evaluation and assessment of the allegations imposed on the judicial system (Kadirova et al., 2021). In Norway, the United Nations Committee's final outlook was quite successful. Every topic of issues mentioned within the Committee's final outlook against torture in 2002 had already been resolved by the Norway state's next consideration in 2007. However, the final outlook issued by the Committee in 2007 was reported as more thorough than the suggestions issued in 2002. Nonetheless, further observation suggests that the Committee against Torture's remarks have created a significant influence on the condition of Norway's rules and procedures (Dimitrijevi? et al., 2021).

In 2008, the United Nations Committee took another look at Sweden. The Committee praised for the deliberate attempts to change and modify the legislation, regulations, and protocols to enhance ber respect for human rights, such as the right of being protected from being subjected to torture and other inhuman misconduct in its overall final outlook (Nowak et al., 2021).