“Drawing upon domestic, international legislation and case law. Whether the bomber can be physically forced to divulge the whereabouts of the explosive device”

The Human Rights Act 1998 gives legal effect in the UK to certain fundamental rights and freedoms contained in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

Article 3 states that no State may permit or tolerate torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Exceptional circumstances such as a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency may not be invoked as a justification of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) sets out fundamental rights that all citizens should have not be subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment. However, the ECHR has made it clear that ill treatment has to attain a minimum level of severity before it can be considered as inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (Ireland v UK 1978). US law also states that, a condemned person is prevented from being humiliated or made to suffer.

More likely, UK law is compatible with European law. Although legally torture is not permitted, but many people believe that it should be in some circumstances. With regards to the admissibility of evidence in court from a suspected terrorist where torture has been used to gain a confession, the main case is A v Secretary of State for the Home Department “In practice that would largely nullify the principle, vigorously supported on all sides, that courts will not admit evidence procured by torture. That would be to pay lip-service to the principle. That is not good enough.”

According to the above discussion it can be said that in this particular scenario the bomber may not be physically force to divulge whereabouts of the explosive device.