WHEN THE IRISH REPUBLICAN ARMY (IRA) TERRORIST ACTIVITY REACHED A PEAK IN 1970, THE OPPOSING BRITISH SOLDIERS RESORTED TO SUCH EXTRAJUDICIAL MEASURES AS DETENTION AND INTERNMENT OF SUSPECTED TERRORISTS. ON DECEMBER 16, 1971, THE REPUBLIC OF IRELAND LODGED A COMPLAINT WITH THE COMMISSION OF HUMAN RIGHTS ALLEGING THAT THE BRITISH TREATMENT OF PRISONERS VIOLATED THE CONVENTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS. THE COURT NOW HAD TO ESTABLISH THE FACTS, ENCOURAGE THE PARTIES TO REACH AN AMICABLE SETTLEMENT, AND, THAT FAILING, PUBLISH ITS FINDINGS. THE BRITISH VOLUNTARILY ABANDONED FIVE METHODS OF INTERROGATION THAT THE IRISH FOUND PARTICULARLY OBJECTIONABLE (PROLONGED STANDING AGAINST A WALL, CONTINUOUS BLINDFOLDING, EXPOSURE TO NOISE, DEPRIVATION OF SLEEP, AND DEPRIVATION OF FOOD AND DRINK). IN EARLIER CASES, THE COMMISSION HAD ABSTAINED FROM RULING ON THE MATTER, IF THE ABUSE HAD MEANWHILE BEEN STOPPED BY THE DEFENDANT PARTY. THIS TIME, HOWEVER, THE COMMISSION RULED THAT THE FIVE TECHNIQUES WHEN USED IN CONJUNCTION OVER A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME DID NOT ONLY CONSTITUTE INHUMAN TREATMENT BUT ALSO AMOUNTED TO A MODERN FORM OF TORTURE. ALTHOUGH THE COURT ITSELF DID NOT GO AS FAR AS THE COMMISSION, IT AFFIRMED, NONETHELESS, THAT THE TECHNIQUES IN QUESTION WERE INHUMAN AND DEGRADING. THE CASE HAS IMPORTANT IMPLICATIONS: FIRST, BEFORE A JUDGMENT WAS HANDED DOWN, THE UNITED KINGDOM HAS EFFECTIVELY ELIMINATED THE CAUSE OF COMPLAINT. SECOND, IN CONDEMNING THE METHODS OF INTERROGATION IN SPITE OF THIS CHANGE, THE COURT AFFIRMED THAT THE PRINCIPLES, RATHER THAN ONE PARTICULAR ABUSE, ARE THE OBJECT OF THE COURT'S ACTIVITY. THE ARTICLE CONTAINS FOOTNOTES THAT REFER TO PARTICULAR SECTIONS OF THE CONVENTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS. --IN FRENCH. (SAJ)