Skip Navigation

European Journal of International Law 2006 17(2):349-367; doi:10.1093/ejil/chl001
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Thienel, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

The European Journal of International Law Vol. 17 no.2 © EJIL 2006; all rights reserved

The Admissibility of Evidence Obtained by Torture under International Law

Tobias Thienel*

* Walther Schücking Institute of International Law, University of Kiel, Germany. I would like to thank Vanessa Klingberg, Nicki Boldt, Björn Elberling, and Philipp-Christian Scheel for their valuable comments. All remaining errors, of course, are mine. Email: tobiasthienel{at}web.de.

The article presents a survey of the international legal issues raised by the use of evidence obtained by torture, which concern not only the procedural right to a fair trial, but also play a part in protection from the abhorrence of torture itself. In this discussion, the author passes comment on the recent English decisions in the case of A and Others. The question of the admissibility of such evidence is broken down into several different cases. All those cases come within the exclusionary rule of Article 15 of the UN Convention against Torture. The article further argues that the inadmissibility is also comprehensive under the right to a fair trial, having regard to the right against self-incrimination and to the unreliability of statements obtained by torture. It is also argued that this exclusionary rule is part of customary international law and that the very concept of jus cogens obliges all states to distance themselves from any violation of its substantive content and to therefore refuse to accept any evidence obtained by torture. The article therefore exposes the exclusionary rule as coextensive with the prohibition of torture and as a function of this prohibition.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.