This article will discuss the UN Convention Against Torture, and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (“Convention”), and how arbitration can be used to best serve victims who were subjected to treatment that is prohibited under the Convention. Part II will give a background on the Convention. Part III will introduce the arbitration provision that is included in Article 30 of the Convention, which is important to the foundation of this article. Additionally, this section will discuss how arbitration works as an Alternative Dispute Resolution procedure, and will highlight some of the benefits of arbitration over litigation. Part IV will discuss some potential objections to the use of arbitration by highlighting some of the potential disadvantages of Article 30 of the Convention. This section will also introduce the jurisdictional issues citizens may face, which includes the notion of state sovereign immunity, as well as a discussion of the possibility of torture being re-instated as a practice in the United States. Part V will propose several solutions for parties seeking relief under the Convention such as a discussion of how to sue a nation, a discussion of cases that have invoked the Convention successfully, asylum as an additional form of relief, the tort exception to sovereign immunity, corporate liability to avoid sovereign immunity, and overall, why arbitration serves as the best solution for victims. Finally, Part VI will provide a conclusory discussion of the role of arbitration in facilitating proceedings under the Convention.
Nicole M. Hogan,
Arbitration and Protection Under the UN Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, Degrading Treatment, or Punishment,
18 Pepp. Disp. Resol. L.J.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/drlj/vol18/iss1/1