Article Sidebar

Submitted
June 7, 2026
Accepted
June 13, 2026
Published
July 5, 2026
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 106 Download : 65

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study examines the impact of detention practices at Guantanamo Bay on global human rights standards. Established by the United States in 2002 following the September 11 terrorist attacks, the facility has become a controversial symbol in the global fight against terrorism. The research aims to analyze the legal framework governing detention, evaluate allegations of human rights violations, and assess the broader implications for international law and human rights norms. Using a doctrinal and analytical methodology, the study reviews international human rights law, humanitarian law, judicial decisions, United Nations reports, and scholarly literature. The findings indicate that practices such as indefinite detention, enhanced interrogation techniques, military commissions, and restrictive detention conditions generated significant legal and ethical concerns regarding due process, torture, and state accountability. The study concludes that while Guantanamo Bay was intended to address national security threats, its practices challenged established human rights principles and significantly influenced international debates on human rights protection and counterterrorism policy.


[Studi ini mengkaji dampak praktik penahanan di Teluk Guantanamo terhadap standar hak asasi manusia global. Didirikan oleh Amerika Serikat pada tahun 2002 setelah serangan teroris 11 September, fasilitas ini telah menjadi simbol kontroversial dalam perjuangan global melawan terorisme. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis kerangka hukum yang mengatur penahanan, mengevaluasi dugaan pelanggaran hak asasi manusia, dan menilai implikasi yang lebih luas terhadap hukum internasional dan norma hak asasi manusia. Menggunakan metodologi doktrinal dan analitis, studi ini meninjau hukum hak asasi manusia internasional, hukum humaniter, putusan pengadilan, laporan Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa, dan literatur ilmiah. Temuan menunjukkan bahwa praktik-praktik seperti penahanan tanpa batas waktu, teknik interogasi yang ditingkatkan, komisi militer, dan kondisi penahanan yang ketat menimbulkan masalah hukum dan etika yang signifikan mengenai proses hukum, penyiksaan, dan akuntabilitas negara. Studi ini menyimpulkan bahwa meskipun Teluk Guantanamo dimaksudkan untuk mengatasi ancaman keamanan nasional, praktik-praktiknya menantang prinsip-prinsip hak asasi manusia yang mapan dan secara signifikan memengaruhi perdebatan internasional tentang perlindungan hak asasi manusia dan kebijakan kontraterorisme.]

Keywords

Guantanamo rights detention torture security

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2026 Rais Ahmad , Anurag Yadav (Author)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
Author Biographies

Rais Ahmad , Department of Political Science, Gandhi Faiz e Aam PG College, Shahjahanpur (U.P.) India.

Assistant Professor 

Anurag Yadav, Department of Political Science, Gandhi Faiz e Aam PG College, Shahjahanpur (U.P.) India.

Research Scholar 

How to Cite
The Impact of Guantanamo Bay Detention Practices on Global Human Rights Standards: Dampak Praktik Penahanan Teluk Guantanamo terhadap Standar Hak Asasi Manusia Global. (2026). SiRad: Pelita Wawasan, 2(2), 317-330. https://doi.org/10.64728/sirad.v2i2.art12
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

How to Cite

The Impact of Guantanamo Bay Detention Practices on Global Human Rights Standards: Dampak Praktik Penahanan Teluk Guantanamo terhadap Standar Hak Asasi Manusia Global. (2026). SiRad: Pelita Wawasan, 2(2), 317-330. https://doi.org/10.64728/sirad.v2i2.art12

References

  1. American Bar Association. (2022). Reports and recommendations on the military commissions at Guantanamo Bay. ABA Center for Human Rights.
  2. Amnesty International. (n.d.). Guantanamo and human rights reports. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2021/01/guantanamo-19-years-of-unacceptable-human-rights-violations/
  3. Axios. (2023, June 26). UN expert says U.S. treatment of remaining Gitmo detainees is "inhuman". https://www.axios.com
  4. Berkeley Human Rights Center. (2014). The Guantanamo effect: A report on the impacts of unlawful detention. University of California, Berkeley, School of Law.
  5. Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. 723 (2008).
  6. Cambridge University Press. (n.d.). Situation of detainees at Guantanamo Bay. International Legal Materials, 45(3), 670–710. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002078290000411X
  7. CBS News. (2023, June 26). U.N. investigator says Gitmo detainees face ongoing "cruel, inhuman and degrading" treatment. CBS Interactive. https://www.cbsnews.com
  8. Center for Constitutional Rights. (n.d.). Guantanamo litigation archive. https://ccrjustice.org/home/what-we-do/our-cases/guantanamo-litigation-archive
  9. Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War (Fourth Geneva Convention), August 12, 1949, 6 U.S.T. 3516, 75 U.N.T.S. 287.
  10. Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War (Third Geneva Convention), August 12, 1949, 6 U.S.T. 3316, 75 U.N.T.S. 135.
  11. Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557 (2006).
  12. Harvard Law Review Association. (2009). Guantanamo Bay and international law: Executive power in the war on terror. Harvard Law Review, 122(4), 1150–1185.
  13. Human Rights First. (2023). Guantanamo detention reports: The cost of injustice. https://humanrightsfirst.org
  14. Human Rights Watch. (2006, February 16). United Nations finds U.S. failed to comply with obligations at Guantanamo. https://www.hrw.org/news/2006/02/16/united-nations-finds-us-failed-comply-obligations-guantanamo
  15. Human Rights Watch. (2006, February 21). U.N. confirms abuses at Guantanamo. https://www.hrw.org/news/2006/02/21/un-confirms-abuses-guantanamo
  16. Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. (2015). Towards the closure of Guantanamo (Report No. OEA/Ser.L/V/II. Doc. 20/15). Organization of American States.
  17. International Commission of Jurists. (2023). ICJ statement on the findings of the UN Special Rapporteur on Guantanamo Bay. https://www.icj.org
  18. International Committee of the Red Cross. (2020). Commentary on the Third Geneva Convention: Relative to the treatment of prisoners of war (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  19. Lawfare. (2023). Analysis of the U.N. Special Rapporteur's findings on Guantanamo Bay. https://www.lawfaremedia.org
  20. Ní Aoláin, F. (2023). Technical visit to the United States and the Guantánamo Bay detention facility: Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism (Report No. A/HRC/52/CRP.3). United Nations Human Rights Council.
  21. Rasul v. Bush, 542 U.S. 466 (2004).
  22. Reuters. (2025). U.S. continues reduction of remaining Guantanamo detainee population. Thomson Reuters. https://www.reuters.com
  23. UN General Assembly. (1948). Universal declaration of human rights (217 [III] A). https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/
  24. United Nations General Assembly. (1966). International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. United Nations, Treaty Series, 999, 171. https://www.ohchr.org
  25. United Nations General Assembly. (1984). Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. United Nations, Treaty Series, 1465, 85. https://www.ohchr.org
  26. United Nations Human Rights Committee. (2007). General comment No. 32: Article 14 (Right to equality before courts and tribunals and to a fair trial) (Report No. CCPR/C/GC/32). United Nations.
  27. United Nations Human Rights Committee. (2014). General comment No. 35: Article 9 (Liberty and security of person) (Report No. CCPR/C/GC/35). United Nations.
  28. United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. (2023). Opinions adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention at its ninety-sixth session (Report No. A/HRC/WGAD/2023). United Nations Human Rights Council.
  29. Yale Journal of International Law Association. (2011). Counterterrorism and human rights standards: The legal black hole of Guantanamo. Yale Journal of International Law, 36(2), 405–440.

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.