从拘留场所自杀预防看欧洲人权体系与生命权:在风险管理与惩罚之间

IF 1.6 2区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Human Rights Law Review Pub Date : 2021-09-11 DOI:10.1093/hrlr/ngab023
Gaetan Cliquennois, Sonja Snacken, Dirk van Zyl Smit
{"title":"从拘留场所自杀预防看欧洲人权体系与生命权:在风险管理与惩罚之间","authors":"Gaetan Cliquennois, Sonja Snacken, Dirk van Zyl Smit","doi":"10.1093/hrlr/ngab023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This paper analyses the shortcomings of European suicide prevention policy in places of detention, a topic that has been neglected in the European legal literature. Four interrelated characteristics of the suicide prevention policies developed by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) are responsible for the failures of these policies. First, the risk-based approach relies on individual risk calculations by national detention authorities to the detriment of environmental factors and a holistic approach. Second, there is an unacknowledged tension in the jurisprudence of the ECtHR between the right to life of detainees and the right to life of potential victims of terrorism and other serious crimes. Third, the jurisprudence on state liability, with its individual risk-based approach, has been translated into highly restrictive death avoidance national practices, which infringe human dignity and reinforce detainees’ willingness to commit suicide. Finally, the right to life does not effectively limit the inherent punitiveness of suicide prevention policies.","PeriodicalId":46556,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The European Human Rights System and the Right to Life Seen through Suicide Prevention in Places of Detention: Between Risk Management and Punishment\",\"authors\":\"Gaetan Cliquennois, Sonja Snacken, Dirk van Zyl Smit\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/hrlr/ngab023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This paper analyses the shortcomings of European suicide prevention policy in places of detention, a topic that has been neglected in the European legal literature. Four interrelated characteristics of the suicide prevention policies developed by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) are responsible for the failures of these policies. First, the risk-based approach relies on individual risk calculations by national detention authorities to the detriment of environmental factors and a holistic approach. Second, there is an unacknowledged tension in the jurisprudence of the ECtHR between the right to life of detainees and the right to life of potential victims of terrorism and other serious crimes. Third, the jurisprudence on state liability, with its individual risk-based approach, has been translated into highly restrictive death avoidance national practices, which infringe human dignity and reinforce detainees’ willingness to commit suicide. Finally, the right to life does not effectively limit the inherent punitiveness of suicide prevention policies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46556,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Rights Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Rights Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngab023\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Rights Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngab023","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

本文分析了欧洲法律文献中被忽视的拘留场所自杀预防政策的不足。欧洲人权法院制定的自杀预防政策的四个相互关联的特点是这些政策失败的原因。首先,基于风险的方法依赖于国家拘留当局对个人风险的计算,损害了环境因素和整体方法。其次,在欧洲人权法院的判例中,被拘留者的生命权与恐怖主义和其他严重罪行的潜在受害者的生命权之间存在着未被承认的紧张关系。第三,关于国家责任的判例及其基于个人风险的方法已转化为高度限制性的避免死亡的国家做法,这些做法侵犯了人的尊严,并强化了被拘留者自杀的意愿。最后,生命权并没有有效地限制自杀预防政策固有的惩罚性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The European Human Rights System and the Right to Life Seen through Suicide Prevention in Places of Detention: Between Risk Management and Punishment
This paper analyses the shortcomings of European suicide prevention policy in places of detention, a topic that has been neglected in the European legal literature. Four interrelated characteristics of the suicide prevention policies developed by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) are responsible for the failures of these policies. First, the risk-based approach relies on individual risk calculations by national detention authorities to the detriment of environmental factors and a holistic approach. Second, there is an unacknowledged tension in the jurisprudence of the ECtHR between the right to life of detainees and the right to life of potential victims of terrorism and other serious crimes. Third, the jurisprudence on state liability, with its individual risk-based approach, has been translated into highly restrictive death avoidance national practices, which infringe human dignity and reinforce detainees’ willingness to commit suicide. Finally, the right to life does not effectively limit the inherent punitiveness of suicide prevention policies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Launched in 2001, Human Rights Law Review seeks to promote awareness, knowledge, and discussion on matters of human rights law and policy. While academic in focus, the Review is also of interest to the wider human rights community, including those in governmental, inter-governmental and non-governmental spheres, concerned with law, policy, and fieldwork. The Review publishes critical articles that consider human rights in their various contexts, from global to national levels, book reviews, and a section dedicated to analysis of recent jurisprudence and practice of the UN and regional human rights systems.
期刊最新文献
The Discursive Evolution of Human Rights Law: Empirical Insights from a Computational Analysis of 180,000 UN Recommendations The ECHR and the Positive Obligation to Criminalise Domestic Psychological Violence Glorification of Terrorist Violence at the European Court of Human Rights The Human Right to Land: A Peasant Struggle in the Human Rights System A Research Agenda for Human Rights and the Environment
×
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