Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

War Criminals Transferred to Serve their Sentences in Foreign Countries and their Right to Family Life: A Comment on the Residual Special Court for Sierra Leone’s Decision in Charles Ghankay Taylor’s Motion for Termination of Enforcement of Sentence in the United Kingdom and for Transfer to Rwanda

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of The Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals

The Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL), now the Residual Special Court for Sierra Leone, convicted Mr. Charles Taylor of war crimes and sentenced him to 50 years’ imprisonment. On 15 October 2013, pursuant to an agreement between the SCSL and the United Kingdom, Mr. Taylor was transferred to serve his sentence in the United Kingdom. In 2014, he challenged his continued imprisonment in the United Kingdom on the grounds, inter alia, that it violated his right to family life and that he should be transferred to serve his sentence in Rwanda. On 30 January 2015, the Residual Special Court for Sierra Leone dismissed Mr. Charles Taylor’s application. The Court’s decision was made public on 25 March 2015. The purpose of this article is to argue that the Court’s decision did not further Mr. Taylor’s right to family life as it left many important questions unanswered. This could be attributed to the Court’s failure to refer to the relevant international human rights jurisprudence on the issue. Although in the case the Court dealt with the issue of cruel and inhuman punishment, this issue is not discussed in detail in this article. This article is mainly concerned with the right to family life.

Affiliations: 1: Faculty of Law, University of the Western Cape BellvilleSouth Africa djmujuzi@gmail.com

10.1163/15718034-12341332
/content/journals/10.1163/15718034-12341332
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
10
5
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/15718034-12341332
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/15718034-12341332
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/15718034-12341332
2017-01-03
2018-10-20

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    The Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation