Chapter 9 Multiple choice questions

1. Which one of the following statements expresses the proper significance of the right not to suffer torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment?

The right not to suffer torture, etc. under Article 3. applies, like all other Convention rights, on the basis of proportionality. There is nothing in Article 3 to prohibit torture, etc. where there is an overwhelming need to protect the rights of others or the public interest.

Although Article 3 applies 'absolutely' in the sense that, specifically, 'torture' can never be justified, proportionality means that States may subject people to 'inhuman' or 'degrading' treatment where there is an overwhelming need to protect the rights of others or the public interest.

Article 3 applies absolutely in the sense that torture and inhuman or degrading treatment and punishment can never be permitted, even in time of war or other emergency facing the life of the nation and even to protect the rights of others or in overwhelming public interest.

Article 3 applies absolutely in the sense that torture and inhuman or degrading treatment and punishment can never be permitted, except in time of war or other emergency facing the life of the nation.

2. Which one of the following statements best describes the way torture is defined for the purposes of Article 3?

Torture, under Article 3, is defined in terms of a once-and-for-all objective standard of deliberately inflicted physical or mental suffering.

Torture, under Article 3, is defined in terms of deliberately inflicted mental or physical suffering, defined further in terms of the culture and traditions of the country involved.

Torture under Article 3 is defined to be co-extensive with the definition of torture in the UN Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT).

Torture, under Article 3, is defined as inhuman and degrading treatment that is particularly serious in terms of the degree of suffering and the intent with which it is imposed. This includes, but is not confined to, the UN Convention Against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT) definition.

3. Match the circumstances to the case in which it was decided whether or not those circumstances involved a breach of Article 3.

A young child was smacked on the behind with a slipper by the head teacher of his school. It was held that the threshold of severity necessary for Article 3 was not passed.

Prisoners, in the early twenty-first century were still required to 'slop out'. This was held to violate Article 3.

Asylum seekers were denied any welfare support at all and left destitute, having to beg for money and food, and sleep rough. This was held to violate Article 3.

A woman with a severe degenerative disease challenged a refusal by the prosecuting authorities to grant her husband immunity from prosecution if he were to assist her suicide. Although this might have left her facing an inhuman and degrading death, the authorities' decision was not 'treatment' invoking Article 3.

4. Which one of the following statements best expresses the decision of the House of Lords in A v Secretary of State for the Home Department (No 2) [2005] UKHL 71?

It is illegal under English law for any judge deciding to admit evidence in a trial, or any official acting on information, to use the product of evidence he or she knows or believes, on a balance or probabilities, has been obtained by torture overseas.

Where a defendant plausibly suggests that evidence may have been obtained by torture inflicted overseas and, after investigation, a court in the UK has evidence that proves, on a balance of probabilities, that the evidence was so obtained, that evidence is inadmissible.

Where a defendant believes that evidence against him was obtained by torture, the burden is on him to prove this. If he can prove it on a balance of probabilities, the evidence is inadmissible; if he cannot prove the evidence is the product of torture, it should be admitted if it is otherwise admissible.

Where a defendant plausibly suggests that evidence may have been obtained by torture inflicted overseas and, after investigation, a court in the UK is unable to prove that, on a balance of probabilities, the evidence was not so obtained, that evidence is inadmissible.

5. The international ban on torture is derived entirely from the provisions of treaties, such as art 3 ECHR and the UNCAT, which states have voluntarily entered into.

True

False

6. In Limbuela, the House of Lords held that Article 3 was violated when asylum seekers, whose claims were still to be dealt with and who do not enjoy the right to work, were denied limited welfare provision because they had not claimed asylum immediately on arriving in the UK. It is a breach of Article 3 for the State to treat a person in a way that'…denies …………'.

7. Match the case to the situation with which it deals.

Tyrer v United Kingdom (1979–80) 2 EHRR 1

Costello-Roberts v United Kingdom (1993) 19 EHRR 112

A v United Kingdom (1999) 27 EHRR 611

R (Williamson) v Secretary of State for Education and Employment [2005] UKHL 15

8. Match the case to the situation with which is deals.

R (on the application of Ullah) v Special Adjudicator [2004] UKHL 26.

D v UK (1997) 24 EHRR 423.

Chahal v UK (1997) 23 EHRR 413.

Ahmed v Austria (1997) 24 EHRR 278.

R(N) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] UKHL 31.

9. Which of these statements best expresses the law of the UK on whether a person can be deported to a country where there is a risk of a violation of a Convention right?

A person cannot be deported to a foreign country if there is a 'real risk' that they will suffer a violation of any of their Convention rights in the country to which they are deported.

A person cannot be deported to a foreign country if there is a 'real risk' that they will suffer a flagrant violation of any of their Convention rights in the country to which they are deported; however they cannot be deported to a country in which they will suffer a real risk that they might be convicted on the basis of evidence obtained by torture in violation of Article 6.

A person cannot be deported to a foreign country if there is a 'real risk' that they will, as a matter of fact, suffer torture, cruel or inhuman treatment, or death in the country to which they are deported; nor can they be deported if they will suffer a 'flagrant' (virtually total) denial of any of their other Convention rights.

A person cannot be deported to a foreign country if there is a 'real risk' that they will suffer torture, cruel or inhuman treatment, or death in the country to which they are deported; nor can they be deported if they will suffer a "flagrant" (virtually total) denial of any of their other Convention rights. Whether these risks exist is a matter of law for the courts, including the appeal courts, to determine.

Quiz Content