Abstract
The Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment (OPCAT) passed the United Nations (UN) General Assembly in 2002. Its objective was twofold: first, to extend the role of the UN in monitoring the standards of detention in Member States through inspection visits; second, to require States to establish internal national preventive mechanisms (NPMs) to monitor their compliance with these international obligations. This article describes the various steps in the 15-year sequence that preceded Australia’s ratification of OPCAT in December 2017. The process has been fraught with political ambivalence: by the Commonwealth Government, concerned not to surrender any part of its sovereignty to an international body; and by the States and Territories, as the principal jurisdictions responsible for various forms of detention, concerned as to the impact OPCAT might have on their day-to-day administration of places of detention. The competing arguments and political ambivalence that have emerged during this 15-year sequence towards ratification are highlighted. It is likely that the model that Australia adopts will initially fall short of best practice. Nevertheless, an opportunity still exists for Australia to contribute to regional approaches towards detention standards and accountability protocols.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 4-22 |
| Number of pages | 19 |
| Journal | Australian Journal of Human Rights |
| Volume | 25 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2 Jan 2019 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Australia’s circuitous path towards the ratification of OPCAT, 2002–2017: the challenges of implementation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver