The Nigerian Anti-Torture Act of 2017 and Its Compatibility with the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights

IF 0.3 4区 社会学 Q3 LAW Journal of African Law Pub Date : 2024-04-05 DOI:10.1017/s0021855324000056
Bayode Sunday Ayo-Ojo
{"title":"The Nigerian Anti-Torture Act of 2017 and Its Compatibility with the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights","authors":"Bayode Sunday Ayo-Ojo","doi":"10.1017/s0021855324000056","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Article 2 of the 1984 Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT) obligates states to take measures to prevent torture. While many states have provisions that prohibit torture, in most cases these do not align with the jurisprudential anti-torture framework required by UNCAT. Before the advent of the Anti-Torture Act, the Nigerian 1999 Constitution prohibited torture, but it was not a crime per se. Any act or omission that constituted torture usually fell under the heading of a civil claim and could also be prosecuted under the criminal or the penal code. However, most cases were prosecuted as grievous bodily harm, attempted murder, assault or murder. The 1999 Constitution failed to detail what constituted torture; in fact, the use of torture did not diminish under the Constitution. To fully apprehend the present situation in Nigeria, it is important to understand the legislative framework and its compatibility with international standards.</p>","PeriodicalId":44630,"journal":{"name":"Journal of African Law","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of African Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0021855324000056","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Article 2 of the 1984 Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT) obligates states to take measures to prevent torture. While many states have provisions that prohibit torture, in most cases these do not align with the jurisprudential anti-torture framework required by UNCAT. Before the advent of the Anti-Torture Act, the Nigerian 1999 Constitution prohibited torture, but it was not a crime per se. Any act or omission that constituted torture usually fell under the heading of a civil claim and could also be prosecuted under the criminal or the penal code. However, most cases were prosecuted as grievous bodily harm, attempted murder, assault or murder. The 1999 Constitution failed to detail what constituted torture; in fact, the use of torture did not diminish under the Constitution. To fully apprehend the present situation in Nigeria, it is important to understand the legislative framework and its compatibility with international standards.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
尼日利亚 2017 年《反酷刑法》及其与《禁止酷刑和其他残忍、不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚公约》和《非洲人权和人民权利宪章》的一致性
1984 年《禁止酷刑和其他残忍、不人道或有辱人格的待遇或处罚公约》(UNCAT)第 2 条规定,各国有义务采取措施防止酷刑。虽然许多国家都有禁止酷刑的规定,但在大多数情况下,这些规定并不符合《联合国禁止酷刑公约》所要求的反酷刑法理框架。在《反酷刑法》出台之前,尼日利亚 1999 年《宪法》禁止酷刑,但酷刑本身并不构成犯罪。任何构成酷刑的行为或不行为通常都属于民事索赔的范畴,也可根据刑法或刑事诉讼法提起诉讼。然而,大多数案件是作为严重人身伤害、谋杀未遂、攻击或谋杀起诉的。1999 年《宪法》没有详细说明什么构成酷刑;事实上,《宪法》并未减少酷刑的使用。要充分了解尼日利亚的现状,就必须了解立法框架及其与国际标准的一致性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
期刊最新文献
Legal Barriers to Women's Access to Elected Parliamentary Seats in Light of 30 Years of Multiparty Democracy in Tanzania Prohibiting Political Party Membership as a Condition for Receiving Political Service Retirement Benefits under Ethiopian Law: A Comparison with Kenya and Tanzania An Assessment of the Doctrine of Commorientes and Its Implications for the Devolution of Testate and Intestate Property in Ghana Custom Versus Customary Law: Does South African Jurisprudence Draw the Distinction? Women, Climate Change and the Law: Lessons for Tanzania from an Analysis of African Nationally Determined Contributions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1