Prisoner Torture Violates Human Rights - Research Paper Example

Prisoner Torture Investigation of any crime or unlawful activity is a precursor to bring the guilty to the rule of law and deliver justice. Therefore, investigation plays a crucial role in detecting and deterring crimes and other unlawful activities from the society. For criminal investigators dealing with cases such as homicide or terrorism plot, properly interacting with witnesses and suspects is essential to unearth the truth. Interrogating subjects like juvenile require special sensitivity. As a result, successful investigators must be resourceful and good in communication. They must be strong in ethics and compassionate. An investigation to uncover misuse of information by a chief executive of a company to buy shares (insider trading) is quite different from a case of suicide or homicide. Despite the fact that over the years, the field of investigation has branched into many specialized parts, the basic rules of good investigations and desired qualities of good investigators are universal for all categories of investigations. Any investigator is supposed to follow ethical means while pursuing investigation. If evidence is gathered from unethical means, then there is little, if any, justice that is delivered. Those signing for government service have to agree to abide by its code of conduct and ethics. For instance, those joining for NSW Police Force agree to its code of conduct and ethics which include behaving honestly, acting with care and diligence when on or off duty (NSW Police Force). The problem is that many of the so called moral and ethical issues are subjective. Generally, it is agreed that there should be no torture with prisoners or tampering or plantation of evidence. But often, there is no thin line of difference between what is ethical and what is not ethical, what is just and what is unjust. Those in CIA and other government agencies have to constantly balance between conflicting interests, and often there is no one line of argument that can justify or defend their action. It is blamed by many human rights activists that there is frequent violation of human rights by federal investigators while interrogating terrorists. Many in CIA and other government agencies justify them as vital for counter-terrorism efforts (Karl). It is true that many investigators at extraordinary times have to make a tough choice between rigid rules and larger welfare. But that should be exceptional. Apart from professional expertise, a good investigation should also be carried out in an ethically responsible manner and should have evidence of that while carrying investigation. In this paper, a study will be made why torture should not be permissible by state from human rights perspective and ineffectiveness of torture in achieving leads. Also, implications of torture will be examined in context of monotheism, atheism, and polytheism belief. Prisoner torture should not be acceptable in any rational and civilized society. It is unacceptable to use prisoner torture methods as a way to get the prisoners confess because such methods symbolize a violation of human rights. Prisoner torture violates human rights, which is the main tenet of any free modern society. Human right is granted to every human being, man or woman, rich or poor, adult or child, healthy or sick, educated or not, and in the case under study, prisoner, whether proved guilty or not (Orend, 16). In US, The First Amendment of the Bill of Rights mentions the right to liberty for all citizens. Under it, people have the right to freedom of speech. If a prisoner is not willing to disclose something, use of torture to reveal is, therefore, illegal. Use of physical torture can definitely harm someone’s physical well being. According to Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) statement by UN, everyone has the right to ‘life, liberty, and security of the person’. The statement clearly mentions that no one can be subjected to torture, or to cruel and unjust punishment (Orend, 107). Also, torture in a way of putting someone’s privacy under threat is not acceptable. The purpose of any criminal investigation is to unearth the truth behind crime. However, the process of finding truth should not be cruel or inhuman. Torture, being an act of cruelty, defies use in any circumstance. The purpose of implementation of human rights in prison and war imply that someone might have committed a wrong against a threat. Naturally such people cannot be friend of a state. Yet, human rights principle keeping in mind that all human beings deserve a humanly treatment does not discriminate on account of their deeds. According to Butler, in human rights ethics, “a right not to be tortured is a prima facie universal right.” Torturing, according to Butler, is wrong as it compels someone to say something which he or she does not wish to say. Butler argues that no one speaking under the threat of coercive impact of torture acts as a free partner in discussion. As a consequence, just because a particular human being is a serious threat cannot make the state eligible to inflict torture on him or her (Butler, 158). In theory, western countries do agree that torture is a crime, yet when it comes to implementation, often rules are tailored to meet one’s immediate ends. It is unfortunate that there are rooms for torture even in democratic, free country like USA under terrorism. The aim of any justice system is to bring order to the society. If the means go wrong, then there will be a much deeper problem. Amnesty International is trying hard to convince countries to raise awareness about prisoner torture that is still occurring in many states. Progress is slow because of other interests that start dominating. For instance, China’s poor human rights records with unlawful detention of citizens and prisoner torture is well documented. Yet, because of its growing economic clout, it appears that democratic world has failed to put meaningful resistance to China (Clark, 45, 52). Torture of prisoners goes against the theological beliefs. Monotheistic religions like Christianity, Islam, and Judaism put their gods supreme. The Quran, the holy book of Islam, suggests the believers to “fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the limits” (Scheifers, 31). The holy book even goes forward to suggest that prisoners could be “set free as a favour” (Scheifers, 31). According to the Bible, the holy book of Christianity, the wrongdoers should be punished or tormented but the right to punish rests with God only – “Vengeance is mine, and I will repay, says the Lord” (Roman 12:19; What does the Bible say about the Torture). Though instances reveal that the execution of prisoners did take place, theologically such actions were not justified. As a consequence, it is important that those who carry out criminal investigation should be careful about putting national issues as reason for inflicting violence on prisoners. The idea is that state should not promote any tendency where someone shows sympathy towards the victim and starts getting involved in acts of cruelty against prisoners. An atheist is someone who does not believe in any religion. It is important that freedom to pursue action without fearing any restriction from religion should not lead an investigator to get involved in torture activity with the prisoner. v The state may have to spend more resource on rehabilitation and post-jurisdiction outcome: the other way, which is morally sound and legal, is never to permit torture to prisoners. There is no evidence that prisoners who received exceptional treatment in Guantanamo Bay in Cuba helped in any significant way in US drive to curb terrorism. At the same time, tortures that prisoners reportedly underwent are shocking. It is not acceptable that any country contradicts bold claims that it makes for standing in favor of human rights because of immediate threats. Despite pressures from international NGOs, not much could have been done to make sure that such incidents are not repeated once and for all. Darius Rejali in his book Torture and democracy examines whether torture works. It is argued that prisoner under torture will always lie. Also, it is said that a prisoner with no information will be forced to lie, make disclosures convincingly so as to avoid torture desperately. Such torture leads to misinformation. Ignorance about a plot is often better than surround oneself with wrong information. The use of force often leads prisoners to accept everything because of fear. Also while telling lies prisoners often vent their anger on their rivals. Citing names of rivals under torture during civil wars are quite common. Also, investigating agencies, who are often excited with new piece of information that would please their superiors, normally do not have the patience to verify before jumping to conclusion ( Rejali, 461). According to CIA Kubark Counterintelligence Manual “Intense pain is likely to produce false confessions, concocted as a means of escaping from distress.” (Rejali, 462) Empirical records show the futility of torture to get any meaningful lead. Between 1500 and mid 1700, in pre-Revolutionary France, investigators intended to seek confessions for about 785 cases. Torturing practices included pumping stomachs with water, dropping hot oil on the feet, or drawing towards fire. The confessions results were only 3-9 percent for Paris, 8-9 percent for Brittany, 10-13 percent for Roussillon, and 14.2 percent for Toulouse. It is reported that most of the time torturers were unable to get a confession. The Roman lawyer Ulpian, who permitted torture in some cases, opined that torture is a “chancy and risky business and one which may be deceptive.” According to him, some will always lie, others will tell any kind of lie that help them avoid torture, and one should not rely on torture while interrogating enemies because they will always lie (Rejali, 462). Perhaps, interrogators need to explore other methods of deriving information from prisoners. Trying to gain a better understanding of prisoner’s psyche is one way to implement better ways of criminal investigation. A popular book for modern interrogation is Criminal Interrogation and Confessions by Fred Inbau and John Reid. The book has significant impact, especially, in the United States. According to Rejali, those trained in the concept of criminal interrogation propagated in the book become human lie detector. Arrigo carried out the study of effectiveness of torture practiced by US as part of counterterrorism efforts. Arrigo examined the point from criminology, organizational theory, social psychology, and interviews with military personnel. The argument that destruction effected by terrorists would be proportionately overwhelming if torture is not applied requires, according to Arrigo, an utilitarian approach. The utilitarian model devised by Arrigo is linking input with output. According to Arrigo, torture of prisoners is equivalent to getting closer to an animal instinct. Perhaps, those who are especially concerned about harmful effects of torture need to look things from such multidisciplinary angles while raising awareness against it. It is imperative that there should be a complete ban on torture as it fails to provide any meaningful utility, except perpetuating cruelty and pain on the victims. Accompanied with this violation of human rights is misinformation that is generated during the process of investigation. Instead, the investigating agencies need to contemplate psychological tools that help them understand better about prisoner’s thought process. Such tools, in addition to being morally sound, would also lead to better image of a country and make it credible. The reform process may occasionally face wrath of security heads. For instance, seven former CIA Directors warned US President Barack Obama that investigations on how security agents carried out criminal investigations post September 11 bombing would not help the country and instead ‘help Al Qaeda elude US intelligence and plan future operations.’ (Karl). Such unilateral positions should not deter political leaders and everyone to make investigating officials accountable if they commit torture in the name of safeguarding state’s interests. References 1. Arrigo, Jean Maria. “A utilitarian argument against torture interrogation of terrorists”. Science and Engineering Ethics, 10.3, 543-72 2. Baars, Mel. Confession and Lament in Nahum 3: Journeys of Healing after War. Certificate in Gender, Divinity School at Duke University, 2008. 3. Butler, Clark. Human rights ethics: a rational approach. Purdue University Press, 2008. 4. Clark, Ann Marie. Diplomacy of conscience: Amnesty International and changing human rights norms. Princeton University Press, 2001. 5. Karl, Jonathan. “Former CIA Directors: Holder's Investigation Could 'Help al Qaeda'. Letter to Obama Warns That The Investigation Will Hinder The CIA's Counter-Terrorism Efforts.” 18 September 2009. ABC News. 3 July 2011. Web. . 6. NSW Police Force. Code of Conduct and Ethics. 3 July 2011. Web. < http://docs.google.com/gview?a=v&q=cache:yLKMS5bgoNUJ:www.police.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/113661/lifestyle.pdf+role+of+the+professional+investigator,+police,+educational+requirements,+lifestyle,+ethics&hl=en&gl=in&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgVjltB-yAIntPIn4H9fP6nyfl-7jZMIB6XiEoptCKj1V-d2QK6HGqBH5LT_uN8Dzm3kydsARHBVY4OOXOxZQ4vkQRYE8wDMFjdI15Pdh2XhjUgocyK2O7yASOUXUuilZd2nYHL&sig=AFQjCNFNGHwW2tYdJm66jcwmghfg-wndsA>. 7. Orend, Brian. Human rights: concept and context. Broadview Press, 2002. 8. Rejali, Darius. Torture and Democracy. Princeton University Press, 2009. 9. Scheipers, Sibylle. Prisoners in war. Oxford University Press, 2010. 10. What does the Bible say about the Torture?, Got Questions, July 5, 2011 from: http://www.gotquestions.org/torture-Bible.html Read More