5cjxburmr

ensure that a State Party’s obligations would not apply to persons outside its territories, such asin occupied territory and leased territory. 981.6.3.4 Convention Against Torture. The United States is a Party to theConvention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. 99The Convention against Torture was not intended to supersede the prohibitions againsttorture already contained in customary international law and the 1949 Geneva Conventions or itsAdditional Protocols. 100 The law of war is the controlling body of law with respect to theconduct of hostilities and the protection of war victims. Nevertheless, a time of war does notsuspend operation of the Convention Against Torture. The Convention Against Torturecontinues to apply even when a State is engaged in armed conflict. 101 For example, a state ofwar could not justify a State’s torture of individuals during armed conflict. 102In addition, where the text of the Convention Against Torture provides that obligationsapply to a State Party in “any territory under its jurisdiction,” such obligations, including theobligations in Articles 2 and 16 to prevent torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment orpunishment, extend to certain areas beyond the sovereign territory of the State Party, and morespecifically to “all places that the State Party controls as a governmental authority.” 1031.6.4 Just War Tradition. The Just War Tradition describes customs, ethical codes, andmoral teachings associated with warfare that military thinkers and philosophers have developedover centuries to seek the moral justification of and the limitations to war. 10498 Refer to § 11.1.2.6 (Occupation and the ICCPR and Other Human Rights Treaties).99 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Dec. 10, 1984,1465 UNTS 85.100 Refer to § 8.2.1 (Protection Against Violence, Torture, and Cruel Treatment).101 Mary McLeod, Acting Legal Adviser, Department of State, Opening Statement at 53rd Session of the U.N.Committee Against Torture, Nov. 3 – 28, 2014, Nov. 12, 2014 (“Although the law of armed conflict is thecontrolling body of law with respect to the conduct of hostilities and the protection of war victims, a time of wardoes not suspend operation of the Convention Against Torture, which continues to apply even when a State isengaged in armed conflict. The obligations to prevent torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment andpunishment in the Convention remain applicable in times of armed conflict and are reinforced by complementaryprohibitions in the law of armed conflict.”).102 Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, art. 2(2), Dec. 10,1984, 1465 UNTS 85, 114 (“No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, 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.”).103 Mary McLeod, Acting Legal Adviser, Department of State, Opening Statement at 53rd Session of the U.N.Committee Against Torture, Nov. 3 – 28, 2014, Nov. 12, 2014 (“In brief, we understand that where the text of theConvention provides that obligations apply to a State Party in ‘any territory under its jurisdiction,’ such obligations,including the obligations in Articles 2 and 16 to prevent torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment orpunishment, extend to certain areas beyond the sovereign territory of the State Party, and more specifically to ‘allplaces that the State Party controls as a governmental authority.’ We have determined that the United Statescurrently exercises such control at the U.S. Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and with respect to U.S.registered ships and aircraft.”).104 WILLIAM O’BRIEN, THE CONDUCT OF JUST AND LIMITED WAR 4 (1981) (“The just-war tradition begins with theefforts of St. Augustine to justify Christian participation in Roman wars. From this foundation, St. Thomas Aquinas25