Isolating children in detention: Cautioning international comparisons

IF 0.7 Q2 LAW
Ergun Cakal
{"title":"Isolating children in detention: Cautioning international comparisons","authors":"Ergun Cakal","doi":"10.1177/1037969X231179862","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Solitary confinement of children is increasingly being challenged in Australian courts, with rulings recently handed down in Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia. Recent international jurisprudence on the harmful practice, and on torture more broadly, stands poised to advance the local cause. This article warns that some international perspectives are outdated, with faulty or politically charged logics, and that, while appearing measured at first sight, reliance on older jurisprudence may ultimately impede progress. Comparative reasoning thus warrants careful consideration, given the complex political (hierarchical, state-deferential), definitional and evidential dynamics (conceiving and substantiating harm, purpose, intention) at play in adjudicating torture and inhuman or degrading treatment.","PeriodicalId":44595,"journal":{"name":"Alternative Law Journal","volume":"48 1","pages":"166 - 171"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alternative Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1037969X231179862","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Solitary confinement of children is increasingly being challenged in Australian courts, with rulings recently handed down in Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia. Recent international jurisprudence on the harmful practice, and on torture more broadly, stands poised to advance the local cause. This article warns that some international perspectives are outdated, with faulty or politically charged logics, and that, while appearing measured at first sight, reliance on older jurisprudence may ultimately impede progress. Comparative reasoning thus warrants careful consideration, given the complex political (hierarchical, state-deferential), definitional and evidential dynamics (conceiving and substantiating harm, purpose, intention) at play in adjudicating torture and inhuman or degrading treatment.
隔离拘留儿童:警惕国际比较
澳大利亚法院对单独监禁儿童的做法提出了越来越多的质疑,维多利亚州、昆士兰州和西澳大利亚州最近都做出了裁决。最近关于这种有害做法的国际判例,以及更广泛的酷刑判例,随时准备推动当地的事业。这篇文章警告说,一些国际视角已经过时,带有错误的或带有政治色彩的逻辑,而且,尽管乍一看似乎是有节制的,但对旧法理学的依赖最终可能会阻碍进步。因此,考虑到在裁决酷刑和不人道或有辱人格待遇时所起的复杂的政治(等级、国家尊重)、定义和证据动态(设想和证实伤害、目的、意图),比较推理值得仔细考虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信