Chapter 8 • International Legal Standards for the Protection of Persons Deprived of Their Liberty In a case where a juvenile court in the Isle of Man had ordered that an adolescent be given three strokes with a cane – a punishment that was in fact executed – the European Court of Human Rights concluded that it neither amounted to “torture”, nor to “inhuman treatment” but that it did constitute “degrading treatment” for the purposes of article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.61 The Court examined in detail whether the punishment could be regarded as “degrading”, and considered that the “humiliation or debasement involved must attain a particular level and must in any event be other than that usual element of humiliation” that follows from judicial punishment in general; the assessment was “relative”, depending “on all the circumstances of the case and, in particular, on the nature and context of the punishment itself and the manner and method of execution”.62 The Court’s description of the nature of corporal punishment was explained in the following words: “The very nature of judicial corporal punishment is that it involves one human being inflicting physical violence on another human being. Furthermore, it is institutionalised violence, that is in the present case violence permitted by the law, ordered by the judicial authorities of the State and carried out by the police authorities of the State... . Thus, although the applicant did not suffer any severe or long-lasting physical effects, his punishment – whereby he was treated as an object in the power of the authorities – constituted an assault on precisely that which it is one of the main purposes of Article 3 to protect, namely a person’s dignity and physical integrity. Neither can it be excluded that the punishment may have had adverse psychological effects.”63 In the view of the Court, the institutionalized character of the violence was “further compounded by the whole aura of official procedure attending the punishment and by the fact that those inflicting it were total strangers to the offender”. Viewing the circumstances “as a whole”, the Court thus concluded that “the element of humiliation attained the level inherent in the notion of ‘degrading treatment’”.64 2.3.4 Medical or scientific experimentation According to the second sentence of article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, “no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.” Failing such consent, the experimentation will be considered to constitute a form of “torture” or “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment”. In its General Comment No. 20, the Human Rights Committee observed that “special protection in regard to such experiments is necessary in the case of persons not capable of giving valid consent, and in particular those under any form of detention or imprisonment. Such persons should not be subjected to any medical or scientific experimentation that may be detrimental to their health”.65 This is of course particularly relevant with regard to people held in psychiatric hospitals. 61 Eur. Court HR, Tyrer case, judgment of 25 April 1978, Series A, No. 26, p. 14, para. 29 and p. 17, para. 35; emphasis added. 62 Ibid., p. 15, para. 30 63 Ibid., p. 16, para. 33. 64 Ibid., pp. 16-17, paras. 33 and 35. 65 United Nations Compilation of General Comments, p. 140, para. 7. Human Rights in the Administration of Justice: A Manual on Human Rights for Judges, Prosecutors and Lawyers 331