Interrogation or Experimentation? Assessing Non-Consensual Human Experimentation During the War on Terror

The prohibition against non-consensual human experimentation has long been considered sacrosanct. It traces its legal roots to the Nuremberg trials although the ethical foundations dig much deeper. It prohibits all forms of medical and scientific experimentation on non-consenting individuals. The pr...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:  
Bibliographische Detailangaben
1. VerfasserIn: Aceves, William J. (VerfasserIn)
Medienart: Elektronisch Buch
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: 2018
In:Jahr: 2018
Online-Zugang: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Verfügbarkeit prüfen: HBZ Gateway
Schlagwörter:

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002c 4500
001 1866134663
003 DE-627
005 20250114054905.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231018s2018 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1866134663 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1866134663 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Aceves, William J.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Interrogation or Experimentation? Assessing Non-Consensual Human Experimentation During the War on Terror 
264 1 |c 2018 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a The prohibition against non-consensual human experimentation has long been considered sacrosanct. It traces its legal roots to the Nuremberg trials although the ethical foundations dig much deeper. It prohibits all forms of medical and scientific experimentation on non-consenting individuals. The prohibition against non-consensual human experimentation is now well established in both national and international law. Despite its status as a fundamental and non-derogable norm, the prohibition against non-consensual human experimentation was called into question during the War on Terror by the CIA’s treatment of “high-value detainees.” Seeking to acquire actionable intelligence, the CIA tested the “theory of learned helplessness” on these detainees by subjecting them to a series of enhanced interrogation techniques. This Article revisits the prohibition against non-consensual human experimentation to determine whether the CIA’s treatment of detainees violated international law. It examines the historical record that gave rise to the prohibition and its eventual codification in international law. It then considers the application of this norm to the CIA’s treatment of high-value detainees by examining Salim v. Mitchell , a lawsuit brought by detainees who were subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques. This Article concludes that the CIA breached the prohibition against non-consensual human experimentation when it conducted systematic studies on these detainees to validate the theory of learned helplessness 
650 4 |a Research 
856 4 0 |u https://core.ac.uk/download/213020806.pdf  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4391815427 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1866134663 
LOK |0 005 20231018043651 
LOK |0 008 231018||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)CORE40822872 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a core 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw