63 | P age b CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1. Conclusion The practice of torture is known since ancient time. Since the middle age the practice of torture as a treatment or/and punishment began to be considered as acts against human dignity. It is from this time onward the scholars tried to define what torture means. However, the legal essence of torture and international movement against the practice of torture trace back to the 19 th century international community‟s movements. Now a day torture is outlawed by several international and regional human rights as well as humanitarian laws. Accordingly, international instruments like UDHR ICCPR, UNCAT, CRC, CERD, CRMW and Refugees Convention and regional human rights standards such as ACHPR, ECHR, and IACHR similarly outlaws torture. Besides, torture is now considered as customary international law and attained the status of jus cognes. Furthermore, member states to the ICCPR and UNCAT are under obligation to criminalize torture as a separate offence and prosecute acts of torture in their domestic legal system. The prohibition of torture is absolute. International laws prohibit practices of torture under any circumstance and impediment for its prosecution. Both ICCPR and UNCAT provides that no limitation or derogation on rights against torture allowed under any circumstance even in the time of state of emergency. So that state cannot limit or derogate the right against torture. Even if not clearly provided under international laws, the jurisprudences of the human rights bodies clarify that defense of necessity and legitimate act cannot be raised as a defense for torture. Although those international laws did not spell out that torture is not subject to different legal and factual impediments of prosecution and sentencing, the jurisprudences of human rights bodies shows grant of amnesty and pardon, protection of immunity and provision of statute of limitation to torture is not allowed to commute torture. This is because such impediments on criminal liability of torture perpetrator are against non-derogabile or absolute nature of prohibition of torture and victims right to get remedy.
