A thorough analysis of the judicial cases of 1978 and 2018 submitted by Ireland to the European Court of Human Rights is being presented. The conflict between the Irish Republican Army and the Royal Ulster Constabulary of the UK caused major social unrest. Gradually Ireland sought independance and the only means to obtain it legally was submitting the case to the Court. To be more specific, the present analysis concerns the effort from the Irish side to make the ECHR classify the acts of violence done to the IRA members from the UK forces as torture. It is a clear breach of the Article 3 of the Convention, however the UK side was well prepared and the judicial struggle was about to continue till 2018. The arguments of both the Applicant and the Defendant State are exposed, as well as the Court's verdict. This case, being a milestone for the Convention itself, is worth studying. For the first time the Court was called to define the term "torture" and adopted the "minimum level of severity" to classify an act as such. Would the Court's decision be different today ? The only sure thing is that the lessons learned from this case should not be forgotten, as they pave the way for better decision-making inside the European Court of Human Rights for the future cases to come.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Part 1: The 1978 Decision
Subsection 1: Historical background - the path to the judicial resolution
Subsection 2: General information on the case
Subsection 3: Ireland's position
Subsection 4: The position of the United Kingdom
Subsection 5: The interpretation of the articles of the ECHR
Subsection 6: The judgment of the Court
Subsection 7: The additional submissions of the Judges
Part 2: The 2018 Decision - The request to reconsider the case
Subsection 1: The placement of Ireland
Subsection 2: The UK placement
Subsection 3: The judgment
Subsection 4: The dissenting opinion of Judge Siofra O’ Leary
Part 3: The contribution of the case today
Research Objectives & Topics
This case study analyzes the milestone conflict between Ireland and the United Kingdom regarding the European Court of Human Rights' (ECtHR) classification of interrogation techniques as torture versus cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment, examining both the original 1978 judgment and the unsuccessful 2018 attempt to revise it.
- The historical development of the Northern Ireland conflict and the emergence of the IRA.
- The legal debate surrounding the "5 techniques" used by British security forces.
- The evolution of the ECtHR’s interpretation of Article 3 of the Convention.
- The procedural constraints and legal certainty arguments affecting the 2018 revision request.
Excerpt from the Book
Subsection 1: Historical background - the path to judicial resolution
The prolonged crisis in Northern Ireland is a violent, long-term conflict that began several decades earlier, with the first signs appearing only in 1921. Ireland, by signing its Treaty of Self-Government (Self Governing Status of Ireland), acquired its own Parliament and government, but remained within the British Commonwealth with 32 provinces that were later reduced to 26. Moving on to 1937 and voting its first Constitution, Ireland became an independent and sovereign state. Gradually Irish citizens were seeking independence from Great Britain, which caused major social upheaval among the local population, which would continue until 1975. After World War II, Ireland chose to leave the British Commonwealth and consequently consolidated its position as a Republic. Ultimately one would expect an end to the social upheavals - which apparently seemed to be religious - but the major issue of concern to the Irish population was political, i.e. whether Ireland would remain part of the United Kingdom or not. This question was the basis for what would follow.
The opposing sides were two religious groups that presented diametrically opposed views of each other. On the one hand, the Protestants (Unionists/Loyalists) wanted Ireland to remain part of the United Kingdom, on the other hand the Catholics (Republicans/Nationalists) envisioned Ireland to be independent of the United Kingdom with its two parts, the North and the South as a whole. The Protestants consisted the 2/3 of the entire population of the country while the Catholics occupied only 1/3. Beyond their beliefs and views, the two groups had a different structure. The Protestants were characterized as an "amorphous mass of rioters" that intimidated the population by kidnapping, torturing and killing people from the Catholic group, unlike the Catholics who were more organized in terms of how they planned and executed their terrorist attacks, and this is demonstrated by the establishment of the criminal organization IRA (Irish Republican Army) with quasi-military structure. The organization did not accept the existence of Northern Ireland as part of the United Kingdom, nor did it recognize Ireland as Republic and was decisive in bringing Ireland’s case to the ECtHR.
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: Provides an overview of the significance of the ECtHR as an international arbiter and introduces the focal case of Ireland v. United Kingdom regarding the definition of torture.
Part 1: The 1978 Decision: Details the historical context of the Northern Ireland conflict, the specific 1971 interrogation techniques, and the initial judicial findings of the ECtHR.
Part 2: The 2018 Decision - The request to reconsider the case: Analyzes the failed 2018 revision request by Ireland, focusing on new evidence and the Court’s emphasis on legal certainty.
Part 3: The contribution of the case today: Concludes with the lasting impacts of the ruling on ECHR law and the evolution of the concept of torture and state emergency measures.
Keywords
ECtHR, Ireland, United Kingdom, Article 3, Torture, Cruel and Inhuman Treatment, 5 Techniques, Northern Ireland, IRA, Human Rights, Judicial Revision, Legal Certainty, Operation Demetrius, European Convention, Case Law
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core subject of this publication?
The paper examines the legal history and judicial reasoning of the European Court of Human Rights regarding the conflict between Ireland and the United Kingdom, specifically concerning the definition of torture in the context of interrogation techniques.
What are the primary themes discussed?
The main themes include the violent history of Northern Ireland, the legal challenge of distinguishing torture from other forms of mistreatment under Article 3, and the procedural boundaries of revising international court judgments.
What is the central research question?
The research investigates whether the interrogation acts committed by British security forces in the 1970s constituted torture and why the ECtHR ultimately refused to revise its initial findings 40 years later.
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The author performs a qualitative analysis of primary legal documents, including court judgments, separate opinions of judges, and supporting academic commentaries, to trace the evolution of the Court's legal interpretations.
What topics are covered in the main section of the book?
The main sections cover the historical background, the specific legal positions held by both Ireland and the UK, the 1978 Court judgment, the 2018 revision request, and critical academic and judicial responses to the rulings.
Which terms characterize this study?
Key terms include Article 3 of the ECHR, the “5 techniques” of interrogation, Ius Cogens, Legal Certainty, and the Margin of Appreciation doctrine.
Why did the 2018 revision attempt fail?
The Court rejected the request because the evidence presented was deemed insufficient to prove that new, decisive facts existed that were unknown to the Court in 1978, and for the need to maintain legal certainty.
How is the term "torture" addressed by the judicial opinions?
Several judges, such as Judge Zekia and Judge Evrigenis, argued that the Court’s 1978 definition was overly restrictive and failed to account for modern, interdisciplinary, or psychological methods of inflicting suffering.
- Citar trabajo
- Konstantina Tzima (Autor), 2022, Judicial Cases of 1978 and 2018 Submitted by Ireland to the European Court of Human Rights. A Case Study, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1438951
