<<previous | index | next>> ConclusionAmnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the International Commission of Jurists consider that diplomatic assurances against torture and ill-treatment circumvent and are inconsistent with the absolute, non-derogable prohibitions of torture and other ill-treatment and forcibly returning a person to a place where he or she risks being subjected to torture or other ill-treatment. As highlighted above, diplomatic assurances have proved to be an ineffective safeguard against torture and other ill-treatment, even when they contain a mechanism for post-return monitoring. They also ignore the need for systemic reforms in receiving states. The organizations consider that the elaboration of minimum standards for the use and content (and reliance on) diplomatic assurances is incompatible with states obligations under international law, and undermine efforts - including of member states, bodies and mechanisms of the Council of Europe - to prevent and eradicate torture and other ill-treatment world-wide.
Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the International Commission of Jurists therefore call on the member states of the Council of Europe; The organizations also urge all the member states of the Council of Europe: [43] To this end, among other things, see Amnesty Internationals 12 Point Programme for the Prevention of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment by Agents of the State available at http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engact400012005
|