Abstract

Police brutality is a problem that plagues countries across the globe. All too frequently the victims of police abuse are racial minorities in their respective countries. This paper investigates the notion that international treaty obligations against torture, racial discrimination, and the violation of civil and political rights, when ratified, make state parties liable for systemic acts of racialized police brutality within their territory. It will analyze the treaty obligations of each country (the United States, France, and Brazil) which stem from their ratification of three treaties: The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, The Convention Against Torture, and The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. A discussion of how race is framed as well as the institutionalization of racism in each of the three societies in question will be followed by an evaluation of the practice of police brutality along racial lines. The United States has a traditionally binary concept of race, and Blacks and Latinos are subjected to disparate treatment at every stage of the criminal process. France adopts the notion of “colorblindness,” however the police’s use of excessive and lethal force against Arab and African suspects is conducted without fear of serious repercussions. And while Brazil sees itself as a “racial Utopia,” non-white Brazilians are disproportionately beaten, tortured, imprisoned, and killed by Brazilian police. Finally, the paper will address the possibility of legal redress for the violation of the above treaties through the practice of racialized police brutality by the United States, France, and Brazil.Key words: police brutality, racial minorities, favela, ghetto, treaty obligations.

Highlights

  • Police brutality is a problem that plagues many countries across the globe

  • This article will investigate the notion that international treaty obligations against torture, racial discrimination, and the violation of civil and political rights, when ratified, make state parties liable for systemic acts of racialized police brutality within their territory

  • How can the international human rights community be effective at addressing problems as minimal as racial discrimination and police brutality, if it is unable to resolve catastrophes as extensive as genocide? This type of argument greatly undermines the significant accomplishments of international human rights law, which go unacknowledged publicly

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Police brutality is a problem that plagues many countries across the globe. All too frequently the victims of police abuse are racial minorities in their respective countries. This article will analyze racialized police brutality as an explicit violation of various ratified international treaties, and as a marker of liability for the United States, France, and Brazil. It will first investigate the treaty obligations of each country (the United States, France, and Brazil) which stem from their ratification of three treaties: The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (“CERD”) (United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 1965), The Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (“CAT”) (United Nations, 1985), and The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (“ICCPR”) (United Nations, 1966). The article will address the possibility of legal redress for the violation of the CERD, CAT, and ICCPR treaties through the practice of racialized police brutality by the United States, France, and Brazil

Treaty obligations
Other relevant international standards
USA:Traditionally binary conception of race
Patterns of police brutality along racial lines
Findings
Potential of Legal Redress
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call