Legal Precedents Supporting the Notion of Torturing Environments

Although the concept has originated in the medical and psychological sphere, it is essential to analyse what legal foundations have been developed to date that can support the legal translation of this concept. This chapter reviews the legal precedents that support the notion of torturing environments. It analyses the factors that, according to international jurisprudence, would indicate or support the consideration of an environment as cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in reports, hearings, or documents from different international human rights bodies. This is followed by an analysis of the judgements of international and regional courts that support the importance of cumulative and prolonged effects for the determination of torture, as well as the incorporation of collective or community perspectives in the assessment of cases considered as amounting to ill-treatment or torture. It then discusses the contexts in which the notion of a coercive environment has been used in international law and the differences and similarities between a coercive environment and a torturing environment. Finally, the chapter presents four specific cases in which the concept of torturous environments would be particularly applicable: the suffering of relatives of persons who have been subjected to enforced disappearance; ill-treatment or torture in institutions for persons with disabilities; human rights violations against indigenous groups to force displacement or foster colonisation; and systematic discriminatory actions by states on the basis of ethnicity, religion, socio-economic status, or other grounds. This chapter details how international human rights bodies, such as the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, have progressively acknowledged the components of torturing environments or ideas that approach the concept as a form of torture. By examining significant legal cases, this chapter illustrates the gradual yet significant development in international human rights law and presents a persuasive argument for incorporating the concept of torturous environments into legal practice.