Article 3: Prohibition of torture

what is a3?

"No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."

What type of right is a3?

An absolute right. No exceptions. No ifs, no buts. Torture is also a non-derogable right under Article 15 ECHR — even in states of emergency, it cannot be suspended.

What negative and positive obligations are there?

1. Not to torture

2. Not to send someone back to a country where they may be at risk of torture.

3. Not to admit evidence obtained by torture into court

Ireland v United Kingdom (1978)

Ireland sued the UK (a rare state-vs-state case at the ECtHR) concerning the British Army's interrogation techniques used on IRA suspects. The Five Techniques were:

Technique	Description
Wall-standing	Forced stress position for hours — spread-eagled, weight on fingertips
Hooding	Black bag over the head at all times except during interrogation (sensory disorientation)
Subjection to noise	Continuous loud hissing noise during interrogation periods
Sleep deprivation	Detainees denied sleep
Deprivation of food and drink	Reduced diet throughout detention

The Court held that ill-treatment must reach a minimum level of severity to fall within Article 3, assessed by: the duration of treatment; its physical or mental effects; and the sex, age, and state of health of the victim. The Five Techniques, considered together, constituted inhuman and degrading treatment but not torture — the distinction lying principally in the intensity of suffering inflicted. This was a condemnation of the UK, but for the lesser category of violation.

Soering v United Kingdom (1989)

A German national who had murdered his girlfriend's parents in the US faced extradition. The ECtHR held that extraditing him to the US, where he faced the death row phenomenon (prolonged psychological suffering while awaiting execution), would violate Article 3. The UK had a duty of non-refoulement

Chahal v United Kingdom (1996)

Chahal had been involved in a conspiracy to kill the Indian Prime Minister. The UK sought to deport him to India, but the ECtHR held this would violate Article 3 because of the real risk of torture in India. Non-refoulement is absolute

A (FC) and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] UKHL 71

The Court of Appeal had divided 2:1 on whether evidence obtained through torture by a third party (a foreign state) could be used in UK courts. The House of Lords unanimously held it could not. Lord Bingham stated that common law principles alone compelled the exclusion of such evidence as unreliable, unfair, and offensive to basic standards of humanity. The European Convention reinforced this position. This case also illustrated that common law was capable of protecting rights without the HRA