Torture and progress, past and promised: Problematising torture’s evolving interpretation

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Standard

Torture and progress, past and promised : Problematising torture’s evolving interpretation. / Cakal, Ergun.

I: International Journal of Law in Context, Bind 19, Nr. 2, 2023, s. 236-254.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Harvard

Cakal, E 2023, 'Torture and progress, past and promised: Problematising torture’s evolving interpretation', International Journal of Law in Context, bind 19, nr. 2, s. 236-254. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744552323000010

APA

Cakal, E. (2023). Torture and progress, past and promised: Problematising torture’s evolving interpretation. International Journal of Law in Context, 19(2), 236-254. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744552323000010

Vancouver

Cakal E. Torture and progress, past and promised: Problematising torture’s evolving interpretation. International Journal of Law in Context. 2023;19(2):236-254. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744552323000010

Author

Cakal, Ergun. / Torture and progress, past and promised : Problematising torture’s evolving interpretation. I: International Journal of Law in Context. 2023 ; Bind 19, Nr. 2. s. 236-254.

Bibtex

@article{138979bedaa14764a791dc9b874fe975,
title = "Torture and progress, past and promised: Problematising torture{\textquoteright}s evolving interpretation",
abstract = "That international law progressively recognises and prohibits emergent forms of torture and related ill-treatment has become widely accepted in the anti-torture discourse. The premise that torture's techniques and contexts change is taken to shape juridical recognition, representation and response. Authoritative international treaties, such as the UN Convention Against Torture, the European Convention on Human Rights and the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, are therefore deemed {\textquoteleft}living instruments{\textquoteright} – influenced by social and scientific change as channelled through the doctrine of dynamic interpretation. This article argues, however, that these premises are not sufficiently empirically grounded and, far from faithfully reflecting social and scientific changes, invoke critiques around the ideological and epistemological registers of advocates and adjudicators. Taking scholarship on dynamic interpretation and forms of state violence which do not leave overt physical marks as paradigmatic entry points, this article problematises torture's juridical conceptualisation and contextualisation through a critical theoretical lens.",
author = "Ergun Cakal",
year = "2023",
doi = "10.1017/S1744552323000010",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "236--254",
journal = "International Journal of Law in Context",
issn = "1744-5523",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Torture and progress, past and promised

T2 - Problematising torture’s evolving interpretation

AU - Cakal, Ergun

PY - 2023

Y1 - 2023

N2 - That international law progressively recognises and prohibits emergent forms of torture and related ill-treatment has become widely accepted in the anti-torture discourse. The premise that torture's techniques and contexts change is taken to shape juridical recognition, representation and response. Authoritative international treaties, such as the UN Convention Against Torture, the European Convention on Human Rights and the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, are therefore deemed ‘living instruments’ – influenced by social and scientific change as channelled through the doctrine of dynamic interpretation. This article argues, however, that these premises are not sufficiently empirically grounded and, far from faithfully reflecting social and scientific changes, invoke critiques around the ideological and epistemological registers of advocates and adjudicators. Taking scholarship on dynamic interpretation and forms of state violence which do not leave overt physical marks as paradigmatic entry points, this article problematises torture's juridical conceptualisation and contextualisation through a critical theoretical lens.

AB - That international law progressively recognises and prohibits emergent forms of torture and related ill-treatment has become widely accepted in the anti-torture discourse. The premise that torture's techniques and contexts change is taken to shape juridical recognition, representation and response. Authoritative international treaties, such as the UN Convention Against Torture, the European Convention on Human Rights and the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, are therefore deemed ‘living instruments’ – influenced by social and scientific change as channelled through the doctrine of dynamic interpretation. This article argues, however, that these premises are not sufficiently empirically grounded and, far from faithfully reflecting social and scientific changes, invoke critiques around the ideological and epistemological registers of advocates and adjudicators. Taking scholarship on dynamic interpretation and forms of state violence which do not leave overt physical marks as paradigmatic entry points, this article problematises torture's juridical conceptualisation and contextualisation through a critical theoretical lens.

U2 - 10.1017/S1744552323000010

DO - 10.1017/S1744552323000010

M3 - Journal article

VL - 19

SP - 236

EP - 254

JO - International Journal of Law in Context

JF - International Journal of Law in Context

SN - 1744-5523

IS - 2

ER -

ID: 324835532