Conflicting International Obligations and the Risk of Torture and Unfair Trial

This article reviews the decisions of UK courts in a case concerning two Iraqi detainees in British military custody who sought to restrain their transfer to Iraqi custody. The detainees claimed that the transfer would violate certain obligations owed to them by the UK under the European Convention...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of international criminal justice 2009-12, Vol.7 (5), p.1133-1147
Main Author: Bhuta, Nehal C.
Format: Article
Language:English
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page 1147
container_issue 5
container_start_page 1133
container_title Journal of international criminal justice
container_volume 7
creator Bhuta, Nehal C.
description This article reviews the decisions of UK courts in a case concerning two Iraqi detainees in British military custody who sought to restrain their transfer to Iraqi custody. The detainees claimed that the transfer would violate certain obligations owed to them by the UK under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), including the prohibition on torture and the right to a fair trial. The article argues that the case presented novel and complex legal questions for resolution, including whether there was a conflict between the UK's obligations under the ECHR and its obligation to respect Iraqi sovereign jurisdiction over its own nationals on its own territory. It is concluded that important elements of the UK courts' reasoning were less than satisfactory.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/jicj/mqp067
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>oup</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_oup_primary_10_1093_jicj_mqp067</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/jicj/mqp067</oup_id><sourcerecordid>10.1093/jicj/mqp067</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-o101t-6bbf9df3786462db8fbf5f6d9020f625de9ddaa2ba752d029a5612c9952436263</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kL1OwzAYRS0EEqVl4gU8sYXan2MnHlHET6WKSlU6R3YcF4fUDo478PaoLWK6957hDgehB0qeKJFs2bu2Xx6-RyKKKzSjeVFmlEl-_d_L4hbdTVNPCAjI8xn6qIK3g2uT83u88qmLXiUXvBrwRg9ufx4TVt7g9NnhrZu-cLC4DjEdY3fmO2-Vi7iOTg0LdGPVMHX3fzlHu9eXunrP1pu3VfW8zgIlNGVCayuNZUUpcgFGl1ZbboWRBIgVwE0njVEKtCo4GAJScUGhlZJDzgQINkePl99wHJsxuoOKPw0lzclCc7LQXCywX0EdUck</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Conflicting International Obligations and the Risk of Torture and Unfair Trial</title><source>Lexis+ UK</source><source>Oxford Journals Online</source><creator>Bhuta, Nehal C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Bhuta, Nehal C.</creatorcontrib><description>This article reviews the decisions of UK courts in a case concerning two Iraqi detainees in British military custody who sought to restrain their transfer to Iraqi custody. The detainees claimed that the transfer would violate certain obligations owed to them by the UK under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), including the prohibition on torture and the right to a fair trial. The article argues that the case presented novel and complex legal questions for resolution, including whether there was a conflict between the UK's obligations under the ECHR and its obligation to respect Iraqi sovereign jurisdiction over its own nationals on its own territory. It is concluded that important elements of the UK courts' reasoning were less than satisfactory.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1478-1387</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1478-1395</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/jicj/mqp067</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><ispartof>Journal of international criminal justice, 2009-12, Vol.7 (5), p.1133-1147</ispartof><rights>Oxford University Press, 2009, All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org 2009</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bhuta, Nehal C.</creatorcontrib><title>Conflicting International Obligations and the Risk of Torture and Unfair Trial</title><title>Journal of international criminal justice</title><description>This article reviews the decisions of UK courts in a case concerning two Iraqi detainees in British military custody who sought to restrain their transfer to Iraqi custody. The detainees claimed that the transfer would violate certain obligations owed to them by the UK under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), including the prohibition on torture and the right to a fair trial. The article argues that the case presented novel and complex legal questions for resolution, including whether there was a conflict between the UK's obligations under the ECHR and its obligation to respect Iraqi sovereign jurisdiction over its own nationals on its own territory. It is concluded that important elements of the UK courts' reasoning were less than satisfactory.</description><issn>1478-1387</issn><issn>1478-1395</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid/><recordid>eNo9kL1OwzAYRS0EEqVl4gU8sYXan2MnHlHET6WKSlU6R3YcF4fUDo478PaoLWK6957hDgehB0qeKJFs2bu2Xx6-RyKKKzSjeVFmlEl-_d_L4hbdTVNPCAjI8xn6qIK3g2uT83u88qmLXiUXvBrwRg9ufx4TVt7g9NnhrZu-cLC4DjEdY3fmO2-Vi7iOTg0LdGPVMHX3fzlHu9eXunrP1pu3VfW8zgIlNGVCayuNZUUpcgFGl1ZbboWRBIgVwE0njVEKtCo4GAJScUGhlZJDzgQINkePl99wHJsxuoOKPw0lzclCc7LQXCywX0EdUck</recordid><startdate>20091210</startdate><enddate>20091210</enddate><creator>Bhuta, Nehal C.</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope/></search><sort><creationdate>20091210</creationdate><title>Conflicting International Obligations and the Risk of Torture and Unfair Trial</title><author>Bhuta, Nehal C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-o101t-6bbf9df3786462db8fbf5f6d9020f625de9ddaa2ba752d029a5612c9952436263</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bhuta, Nehal C.</creatorcontrib><jtitle>Journal of international criminal justice</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bhuta, Nehal C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Conflicting International Obligations and the Risk of Torture and Unfair Trial</atitle><jtitle>Journal of international criminal justice</jtitle><date>2009-12-10</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>7</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>1133</spage><epage>1147</epage><pages>1133-1147</pages><issn>1478-1387</issn><eissn>1478-1395</eissn><abstract>This article reviews the decisions of UK courts in a case concerning two Iraqi detainees in British military custody who sought to restrain their transfer to Iraqi custody. The detainees claimed that the transfer would violate certain obligations owed to them by the UK under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), including the prohibition on torture and the right to a fair trial. The article argues that the case presented novel and complex legal questions for resolution, including whether there was a conflict between the UK's obligations under the ECHR and its obligation to respect Iraqi sovereign jurisdiction over its own nationals on its own territory. It is concluded that important elements of the UK courts' reasoning were less than satisfactory.</abstract><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.1093/jicj/mqp067</doi><tpages>15</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1478-1387
ispartof Journal of international criminal justice, 2009-12, Vol.7 (5), p.1133-1147
issn 1478-1387
1478-1395
language eng
recordid cdi_oup_primary_10_1093_jicj_mqp067
source Lexis+ UK; Oxford Journals Online
title Conflicting International Obligations and the Risk of Torture and Unfair Trial
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T18%3A14%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-oup&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Conflicting%20International%20Obligations%20and%20the%20Risk%20of%20Torture%20and%20Unfair%20Trial&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20international%20criminal%20justice&rft.au=Bhuta,%20Nehal%20C.&rft.date=2009-12-10&rft.volume=7&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=1133&rft.epage=1147&rft.pages=1133-1147&rft.issn=1478-1387&rft.eissn=1478-1395&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/jicj/mqp067&rft_dat=%3Coup%3E10.1093/jicj/mqp067%3C/oup%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-o101t-6bbf9df3786462db8fbf5f6d9020f625de9ddaa2ba752d029a5612c9952436263%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_oup_id=10.1093/jicj/mqp067&rfr_iscdi=true