評論
打印
So let's look more closely at definitional issues and then return to the apparent excuses which if valid would revamp the charge of evil.
暗示可能的借口那么就讓我們來細看一看定義問題然后再回來看那些明顯的借口如果這些借口是有效的將會修改對罪惡的控告
The 1948 universal declaration of human rights says.
1948年的世界人權宣言指出
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
沒有人應遭受酷刑或者殘酷的 非人道的或者可恥的對待或者懲罰
The 1975 UN declaration against torture defines torture as any act by which severe pain or suffering,
1975年的聯合國反酷刑公約將酷刑定義為為獲得信息
physical or mental is intentionally inflicted by a public official or a person for such purposes as
供認懲罰威脅或者出于其它目的公務人員或者懷有此類目的的人員
obtaining information, or a confession, punishing him or intimidating him or other persons.
對于他人故意施加生理的或者心理的痛苦的做法
It does not include pain or suffering arising only from lawful sanctions to the extent consistent with the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners.
這并不包括與符合最低標準的管理囚犯的行為所造成的痛苦
It adds, torture constitutes an aggravated and deliberate form of cruel inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
同時公約中也指出酷刑包括了加重的和故意的殘忍非人性可恥的對待或者懲罰
In the 1984 UN convention against torture, the following words were deleted to the extent consistent with the standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners
在1984年的聯合國反酷刑公約中刪去了一下內容符合最低標準的管理囚犯的行為
and it concluded simply it does not include pain or suffering only from lawful sanctions.
只是簡單地結論說不包括合法制裁所造成的痛苦
Both documents where strict torture to acts of public officials, although the morally relevant powers can be possessed by others.
兩個文件中所指的酷刑都是限于公務人員的行為盡管這種權力可能也會歸其他人員所有
Within school pit defines the convention rejects torture absolutely.
通過校核定義公約完全拒絕了酷刑
It says no exceptional circumstances whatsoever,
它什么例外情況都沒有提
whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency may be invoked as a justification of torture.
不管是否處于戰爭狀態或者有戰爭威脅國內政治動亂或者任何其它的公共緊急事件都可能成為酷刑的正當理由
