Cestaro v. Italy

The European Court of Human Rights on the Duty to Criminalise Torture and Italy’s Structural Problem

Domenico Carolei

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In April 2015, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled that Italian legislation is inadequate to criminalise acts of torture (Cestaro v. Italy). Following the ECtHR’s decision, the Italian Parliament approved the bill A.C. 2168 which aimed to introduce the crime of torture (Article 613-bis) in the Italian Criminal Code. The bill does not seem to comply with the definition of torture provided by international law, and also neglects the legislative guidelines outlined by the ECtHR in Cestaro v. Italy. The purpose of this article is twofold. On the one hand, it will assess the ECtHR’s decision focusing on Italy’s structural problem and its duty to enact and enforce efficient criminal provisions under Article 3 of the European Convention. On the other hand, it will analyse the normative content of Article 613-bis in order to highlight its weaknesses and propose, on each of them, suggestions for amendment.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)567 – 585
Number of pages19
JournalInternational Criminal Law Review
Volume17
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Fingerprint

structural problem
torture
Italy
human rights
bill
European Convention
international law
parliament
amendment
neglect
legislation
offense

Keywords

  • crime of torture
  • Cestaro v. Italy
  • European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)
  • duty to criminalise torture
  • bill A.C. 2168
  • Art. 61-bis Italian Criminal Code

Cite this

Cestaro v. Italy : The European Court of Human Rights on the Duty to Criminalise Torture and Italy’s Structural Problem. / Carolei, Domenico.

In: International Criminal Law Review , Vol. 17, No. 3, 2017, p. 567 – 585.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{921e432bcaf44c80b181e019d27c1aa6,
title = "Cestaro v. Italy: The European Court of Human Rights on the Duty to Criminalise Torture and Italy’s Structural Problem",
abstract = "In April 2015, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled that Italian legislation is inadequate to criminalise acts of torture (Cestaro v. Italy). Following the ECtHR’s decision, the Italian Parliament approved the bill A.C. 2168 which aimed to introduce the crime of torture (Article 613-bis) in the Italian Criminal Code. The bill does not seem to comply with the definition of torture provided by international law, and also neglects the legislative guidelines outlined by the ECtHR in Cestaro v. Italy. The purpose of this article is twofold. On the one hand, it will assess the ECtHR’s decision focusing on Italy’s structural problem and its duty to enact and enforce efficient criminal provisions under Article 3 of the European Convention. On the other hand, it will analyse the normative content of Article 613-bis in order to highlight its weaknesses and propose, on each of them, suggestions for amendment.",
keywords = "crime of torture, Cestaro v. Italy, European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), duty to criminalise torture, bill A.C. 2168, Art. 61-bis Italian Criminal Code",
author = "Domenico Carolei",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.1163/15718123-01703003",
language = "English",
volume = "17",
pages = "567 – 585",
journal = "International Criminal Law Review",
publisher = "Brill",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cestaro v. Italy

T2 - The European Court of Human Rights on the Duty to Criminalise Torture and Italy’s Structural Problem

AU - Carolei, Domenico

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - In April 2015, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled that Italian legislation is inadequate to criminalise acts of torture (Cestaro v. Italy). Following the ECtHR’s decision, the Italian Parliament approved the bill A.C. 2168 which aimed to introduce the crime of torture (Article 613-bis) in the Italian Criminal Code. The bill does not seem to comply with the definition of torture provided by international law, and also neglects the legislative guidelines outlined by the ECtHR in Cestaro v. Italy. The purpose of this article is twofold. On the one hand, it will assess the ECtHR’s decision focusing on Italy’s structural problem and its duty to enact and enforce efficient criminal provisions under Article 3 of the European Convention. On the other hand, it will analyse the normative content of Article 613-bis in order to highlight its weaknesses and propose, on each of them, suggestions for amendment.

AB - In April 2015, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled that Italian legislation is inadequate to criminalise acts of torture (Cestaro v. Italy). Following the ECtHR’s decision, the Italian Parliament approved the bill A.C. 2168 which aimed to introduce the crime of torture (Article 613-bis) in the Italian Criminal Code. The bill does not seem to comply with the definition of torture provided by international law, and also neglects the legislative guidelines outlined by the ECtHR in Cestaro v. Italy. The purpose of this article is twofold. On the one hand, it will assess the ECtHR’s decision focusing on Italy’s structural problem and its duty to enact and enforce efficient criminal provisions under Article 3 of the European Convention. On the other hand, it will analyse the normative content of Article 613-bis in order to highlight its weaknesses and propose, on each of them, suggestions for amendment.

KW - crime of torture

KW - Cestaro v. Italy

KW - European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)

KW - duty to criminalise torture

KW - bill A.C. 2168

KW - Art. 61-bis Italian Criminal Code

U2 - 10.1163/15718123-01703003

DO - 10.1163/15718123-01703003

M3 - Article

VL - 17

SP - 567

EP - 585

JO - International Criminal Law Review

JF - International Criminal Law Review

IS - 3

ER -