Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment A Comparative Study between Intemationallaw, Islamic Jurisprudence and the Iranian Legal System

By Ali Mokhtari 

The elimination of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment has been a dream for reformists and human rights activists for centuries. Yet, despite these efforts torture is still being practiced in many counties. Global efforts have been made by individuals and national governments to proscribe the use of torture. Unfortunately, fin ding an internationally accepted definition ofwhat types of activities constitute torture has been a major obstacle in the battle toward its abolition. Is it an activity qualified as torture only when it is carried out for certain purposes? At the heart of the debate lies the question of whether or not corporal punishment is a form of torture. While corporal punishment is contrary to international legislation, such as the UN Declaration on the Protection of AIl Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and the UN Convention Against Torture, aspects of corporal punishment remain acceptable according certain religious traditions. An example of this is found in traditional Islamic law, which has banned both torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment, when used for the express purpose of obtaining confessions or information. In other circumstances, however, severe corporal punishment is acceptable in Islamic law. As a result, sorne Islamic states whose domestic law is rooted in traditional Islamic law, justify their use of torture by invoking Islamic traditions: they claim that corporal punishment is derived from God's will. These states tend to consider its use as lawful sanctions, and it is made legal under their domestic law. In this paper, Iran is studied as one such state.

Library and Archives Canada