{"title":"剥夺远洋捕鱼船队的自由:《禁止酷刑公约》监测工作的新动力?","authors":"P. Doubek","doi":"10.1080/1323238X.2022.2099629","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Detention monitoring under the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture is today broadly considered as covering a plethora of non-traditional places, including but not limited to various care facilities, institutions for children or migrant shelters. The COVID-19 pandemic has further shown that there is an abundance of public health measures that likely involve a deprivation of personal liberty. In addition to the challenges brought by the world’s pandemic, there remain primordial man-made ‘illnesses’ such as workers’ exploitation, forced labour, slavery and trafficking in person that likewise concerns deprivation of liberty and ill-treatment. This is especially true for documented prison-like conditions on distant water fishing fleets where workers are confined to the physical boundaries of the ship and could not leave the terrible conditions to which they are often subjected. Therefore, a question has emerged as to what elements constitute the ‘place of detention’ under the Optional Protocol and what is the extent of detention monitoring? Examining the use of the OPCAT on the specific situation of ill-treatment on Taiwan fishing fleets is believed to put some flash to the ongoing discussion and clarify further the monitoring mandate of the National Preventive Mechanism.","PeriodicalId":37430,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Human Rights","volume":"28 1","pages":"56 - 73"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deprivation of liberty on distant water fishing fleets: a new impetus for the OPCAT monitoring?\",\"authors\":\"P. Doubek\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1323238X.2022.2099629\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Detention monitoring under the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture is today broadly considered as covering a plethora of non-traditional places, including but not limited to various care facilities, institutions for children or migrant shelters. The COVID-19 pandemic has further shown that there is an abundance of public health measures that likely involve a deprivation of personal liberty. In addition to the challenges brought by the world’s pandemic, there remain primordial man-made ‘illnesses’ such as workers’ exploitation, forced labour, slavery and trafficking in person that likewise concerns deprivation of liberty and ill-treatment. This is especially true for documented prison-like conditions on distant water fishing fleets where workers are confined to the physical boundaries of the ship and could not leave the terrible conditions to which they are often subjected. Therefore, a question has emerged as to what elements constitute the ‘place of detention’ under the Optional Protocol and what is the extent of detention monitoring? Examining the use of the OPCAT on the specific situation of ill-treatment on Taiwan fishing fleets is believed to put some flash to the ongoing discussion and clarify further the monitoring mandate of the National Preventive Mechanism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37430,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journal of Human Rights\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"56 - 73\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journal of Human Rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1323238X.2022.2099629\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1323238X.2022.2099629","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
Deprivation of liberty on distant water fishing fleets: a new impetus for the OPCAT monitoring?
ABSTRACT Detention monitoring under the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention against Torture is today broadly considered as covering a plethora of non-traditional places, including but not limited to various care facilities, institutions for children or migrant shelters. The COVID-19 pandemic has further shown that there is an abundance of public health measures that likely involve a deprivation of personal liberty. In addition to the challenges brought by the world’s pandemic, there remain primordial man-made ‘illnesses’ such as workers’ exploitation, forced labour, slavery and trafficking in person that likewise concerns deprivation of liberty and ill-treatment. This is especially true for documented prison-like conditions on distant water fishing fleets where workers are confined to the physical boundaries of the ship and could not leave the terrible conditions to which they are often subjected. Therefore, a question has emerged as to what elements constitute the ‘place of detention’ under the Optional Protocol and what is the extent of detention monitoring? Examining the use of the OPCAT on the specific situation of ill-treatment on Taiwan fishing fleets is believed to put some flash to the ongoing discussion and clarify further the monitoring mandate of the National Preventive Mechanism.
期刊介绍:
The Australian Journal of Human Rights (AJHR) is Australia’s first peer reviewed journal devoted exclusively to human rights development in Australia, the Asia-Pacific region and internationally. The journal aims to raise awareness of human rights issues in Australia and the Asia-Pacific region by providing a forum for scholarship and discussion. The AJHR examines legal aspects of human rights, along with associated philosophical, historical, economic and political considerations, across a range of issues, including aboriginal ownership of land, racial discrimination and vilification, human rights in the criminal justice system, children’s rights, homelessness, immigration, asylum and detention, corporate accountability, disability standards and free speech.