Abstract
This editorial critically examines the use of administrative movement restrictions—particularly house arrest—as extrajudicial counter-terrorism measures, highlighting their widespread application in both democratic and authoritarian regimes. Drawing from legal analysis, case studies and forensic evidence, it argues that such measures—when imposed without due process, judicial oversight, or proportional safeguards—can amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and even torture. House arrest, especially when indefinite and coupled with intrusive surveillance, stigmatisation, and lack of access to basic needs or legal remedies, often constitutes a coercive environment with profound psychological and social impacts. Using the framework of the Istanbul Protocol and relevant UN standards, the article maps the legal and clinical thresholds at which deprivation of liberty in home settings transitions into a torturing environment. The editorial calls for urgent international scrutiny of these practices, emphasising the need to reinforce legal safeguards, ensure judicial review, and uphold human dignity in the face of expanding administrative powers.