TY - JOUR

T1 - Diplomatic assurances - a permissible tool in the struggle against terrorism?

AU - Mouyal, Lone Wandahl

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - With the noble intentions of combating terrorism, numerous initiativesin the form of counter-terrorism measures have appeared on the global scene. Stateswanting to expel persons considered to be a threat to national security have aimed toestablish so-called diplomatic assurances as a guarantee that States well-known forgross human rights violations will ensure that the person concerned is not exposed totorture or ill-treatment. Reliance on these assurances has been questioned by many;scholars, UN bodies and NGO’s, and practice shows that there is reason for concern.Th is paper examines such reliance on diplomatic assurances by scrutinizing thepractice and the case-law of the UN treaty bodies, the European Court of HumanRights (ECtHR) and the offi cial statements and reports of UN institutions such asthe Human Rights Council, Th e Offi cer of the High Commissioner for HumanRights as well as the Special Rapporteurs. Unreliable monitoring mechanismsand the lack of consequences in the case of a breach of such legally non-bindingagreements leads to the conclusion that these assurances may be solely hypothetical,insignifi cant and of no real value.

AB - With the noble intentions of combating terrorism, numerous initiativesin the form of counter-terrorism measures have appeared on the global scene. Stateswanting to expel persons considered to be a threat to national security have aimed toestablish so-called diplomatic assurances as a guarantee that States well-known forgross human rights violations will ensure that the person concerned is not exposed totorture or ill-treatment. Reliance on these assurances has been questioned by many;scholars, UN bodies and NGO’s, and practice shows that there is reason for concern.Th is paper examines such reliance on diplomatic assurances by scrutinizing thepractice and the case-law of the UN treaty bodies, the European Court of HumanRights (ECtHR) and the offi cial statements and reports of UN institutions such asthe Human Rights Council, Th e Offi cer of the High Commissioner for HumanRights as well as the Special Rapporteurs. Unreliable monitoring mechanismsand the lack of consequences in the case of a breach of such legally non-bindingagreements leads to the conclusion that these assurances may be solely hypothetical,insignifi cant and of no real value.

M3 - Journal article

VL - 2

SP - 113

EP - 126

JO - Czech Yearbook of Public and Private International Law

JF - Czech Yearbook of Public and Private International Law

SN - 1805-0565

ER -