In 2018, Mr Nathan Davidson was sentenced for six years and nine months, with a non-parole period of three years and eight months. Mr Davidson was held in solitary confinement on the ‘hard side’ of the Management Unit for a total of 63 days. Mr Davidson challenged the lawfulness of the rear courtyard under the Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) (Human Rights Act) in the ACT Supreme Court.
Read MoreSonko v Spain, UN Doc CAT/C/47/D/368/2008 (20 February 2012)
Summary
The UN Committee against Torture has found that Spain violated its obligations under the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in its treatment of Senegalese asylum seeker Mr Sonko, who drowned after being forced out of a Spanish Civil Guard vessel. This decision exemplifies that placing a person in a situation that causes his or her death will constitute cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment in contravention of article 16 of the Convention.
Read MoreThe Queen (on the application of S) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCH 2120 (Admin) (5 August 2011)
The Claimant, S, sought judicial review of the decision to detain him pending deportation. Owing to circumstances relating to his mental illness, the High Court of England and Wales held that S's detention amounted to false imprisonment and a violation of Articles 3 and 5 of the European Convention of Human Rights, which prohibit inhuman or degrading treatment and protect an individual's right to liberty and security of the person, respectively.
Read MoreSuppiah & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWHC 2 (Admin) (11 January 2011)
The High Court of England and Wales decided that two families who had sought asylum in the United Kingdom were detained unlawfully by the Secretary of State for the Home Department (Defendant) because the Defendant failed to have regard to its duty to safeguard and promote the welfare of children.
Read MoreKwok v Australia, CCPR/C/97/D/1442/2005 (23 November 2009)
The United Nations Human Rights Committee has found Australia to be in breach of its obligations under art 9(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in relation to mandatory immigration detention. The Committee ruled that 'detention for a period in excess of four years without any chance of substantive judicial review is arbitrary within the meaning of Article 9(1)'. The Committee also found potential breaches of arts 6 and 7 of the ICCPR if Australia returns the author, Ms Kwok, to China where she will likely face the death penalty.
Read MoreShams & Ors v Australia, HRC, UN Doc CCPR/C/90/D/1255, 1256, 1259, 1260, 1266, 1268, 1270, 1288/2004 (11 September 2007)
In a decision regarding mandatory immigration detention, the UN Human Rights Committee has elucidated its jurisprudence on the content and application of art 9 of the ICCPR, the right to liberty and security of person and to be free from arbitrary detention.
Read More