Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

(Re)Defining Torture: Jurisprudential Cross-fertilisation in the Context of Torture

Lundgren, Engla LU (2025) LAGF03 20251
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
This thesis examines the phenomenon of legal cross-fertilisation by analysing how the ad hoc International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia have implemented International Human Rights Law with regard to the defini-tion of torture.
This thesis employs the legal dogmatic method with an emphasis on the sources of law in International Law. Two cases from the ICTY have been the subject of analysis to this paper, Delalić and Kunarac. The essay accounts for in what manner the Trial Chamber examine what requirements constitute the prohibition of torture, as prescribed in the Geneva Conventions of 1949.
In the case of Delalić, the TC argued that the involvement of a public official was one of the constitutive elements of torture, but... (More)
This thesis examines the phenomenon of legal cross-fertilisation by analysing how the ad hoc International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia have implemented International Human Rights Law with regard to the defini-tion of torture.
This thesis employs the legal dogmatic method with an emphasis on the sources of law in International Law. Two cases from the ICTY have been the subject of analysis to this paper, Delalić and Kunarac. The essay accounts for in what manner the Trial Chamber examine what requirements constitute the prohibition of torture, as prescribed in the Geneva Conventions of 1949.
In the case of Delalić, the TC argued that the involvement of a public official was one of the constitutive elements of torture, but subsequently overturned this position in the Kunarac case. Instruments from International Human Rights Law was used as a basis for examination in both cases, and initially, the definition of torture was verbatim adopted from a Human Rights Instru-ment.
In Kunarac, the Trial Chamber conversely assume a more critical view of cross-fertilisation. The TC highlights the structural differences between Inter-national Criminal Law and International Human Rights Law, while consulting a broader selection of sources to find support for this argument.
The study finds that in Delalić, the TC employed a flawed method for inter-preting the Human Rights instruments, and, in Kunarac, it is suggested they may have ultimately arrived at a broader definition of torture than warranted. The essay argues that the broadened definition endangers the specialised na-ture of the offence and risks its trivialisation.
The essay underlines the potential of harmonisation between fragmented sys-tems of International Law through the use of trans-judicial dialogue, as well as cautions for when it is applied without careful consideration. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Denna uppsats undersöker fenomenet rättslig korsbefruktning genom att ana-lysera hur den ad hoc-inrättade Internationella krigsförbrytartribunalen för det forna Jugoslavien har implementerat internationell människorättslagstiftning i förhållande till definitionen av tortyr.
Uppsatsen tillämpar en rättsdogmatisk metod med fokus på folkrättens rätt-skällelära. Två fall från ICTY har varit föremål för analys i uppsatsen: Delalić och Kunarac. Denna uppsats redogör för hur tribunalen prövar vilka rekvisit som utgör förbudet mot tortyr, såsom det föreskrivs i Genèvekonventionerna från 1949.
I Delalić hävdade Tribunalen att medverkan av en offentlig tjänsteman ut-gjorde ett konstituerande element av tortyr, men denna ståndpunkt övergavs senare... (More)
Denna uppsats undersöker fenomenet rättslig korsbefruktning genom att ana-lysera hur den ad hoc-inrättade Internationella krigsförbrytartribunalen för det forna Jugoslavien har implementerat internationell människorättslagstiftning i förhållande till definitionen av tortyr.
Uppsatsen tillämpar en rättsdogmatisk metod med fokus på folkrättens rätt-skällelära. Två fall från ICTY har varit föremål för analys i uppsatsen: Delalić och Kunarac. Denna uppsats redogör för hur tribunalen prövar vilka rekvisit som utgör förbudet mot tortyr, såsom det föreskrivs i Genèvekonventionerna från 1949.
I Delalić hävdade Tribunalen att medverkan av en offentlig tjänsteman ut-gjorde ett konstituerande element av tortyr, men denna ståndpunkt övergavs senare i Kunarac. Instrument från internationell människorättslagstiftning användes som grund för bedömningen i båda fallen och först antogs definit-ionen av tortyr ordagrant från ett människorättsinstrument.
I Kunarac intar däremot tribunalen en mer kritisk hållning till rättslig korsbe-fruktning. Rätten framhåller de strukturella skillnaderna mellan internationell straffrätt och internationell människorättsrätt, samtidigt som den konsulterar ett bredare urval av källor för att stödja sin argumentation.
Uppsatsen drar slutsatsen att i Delalić tillämpade tribunalen en bristfällig tolk-ningsmetod av människorättsinstrumenten, och att tribunalen i Kunarac möj-ligen kom fram till en bredare definition av tortyr än vad som var motiverat. Uppsatsen argumenterar för att denna utvidgade definition riskerar att under-minera brottets specialiserade karaktär och leda till en trivialisering av brottet.
Uppsatsen lyfter fram potentialen för harmonisering mellan fragmenterade system inom folkrätten genom transjudiciell dialog, men höjer också ett var-ningens finger för riskerna med en sådan tillämpning om den sker utan till-räcklig eftertanke. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Lundgren, Engla LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20251
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
Folkrätt, Cross-fertilisation, Torture
language
English
id
9190528
date added to LUP
2025-06-23 13:11:31
date last changed
2025-06-23 13:11:31
@misc{9190528,
  abstract     = {{This thesis examines the phenomenon of legal cross-fertilisation by analysing how the ad hoc International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia have implemented International Human Rights Law with regard to the defini-tion of torture.
This thesis employs the legal dogmatic method with an emphasis on the sources of law in International Law. Two cases from the ICTY have been the subject of analysis to this paper, Delalić and Kunarac. The essay accounts for in what manner the Trial Chamber examine what requirements constitute the prohibition of torture, as prescribed in the Geneva Conventions of 1949.
In the case of Delalić, the TC argued that the involvement of a public official was one of the constitutive elements of torture, but subsequently overturned this position in the Kunarac case. Instruments from International Human Rights Law was used as a basis for examination in both cases, and initially, the definition of torture was verbatim adopted from a Human Rights Instru-ment. 
In Kunarac, the Trial Chamber conversely assume a more critical view of cross-fertilisation. The TC highlights the structural differences between Inter-national Criminal Law and International Human Rights Law, while consulting a broader selection of sources to find support for this argument.
The study finds that in Delalić, the TC employed a flawed method for inter-preting the Human Rights instruments, and, in Kunarac, it is suggested they may have ultimately arrived at a broader definition of torture than warranted. The essay argues that the broadened definition endangers the specialised na-ture of the offence and risks its trivialisation. 
The essay underlines the potential of harmonisation between fragmented sys-tems of International Law through the use of trans-judicial dialogue, as well as cautions for when it is applied without careful consideration.}},
  author       = {{Lundgren, Engla}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{(Re)Defining Torture: Jurisprudential Cross-fertilisation in the Context of Torture}},
  year         = {{2025}},
}