Torture, the infliction of severe physical or psychological pain upon an individual to extract information, a confession or as a punishment, is prohibited by international law and illegal in most countries. However, it is still used unofficially by modern governments. This article describes uses of torture in recent times, that is to say, the use of torture since the adoption of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which prohibited it.
Torture in modern society
Torture is still common in many countries, particularly those with despotic or totalitarian regimes. In fact, many countries find it expedient from time to time to use torture; at the same time, few wish to be described as doing so, either to their own citizens or international bodies. So a variety of strategies are used circumvent this quandry, including state plausible deniability, "secret police", "need to know", denial that given treatments are torturous in nature, appeal to various laws (national or international), use of juristictional argument, claim of "overriding need", the use of Torture by proxy and so on.
Torture country by country
Western democracies tend to have fewer but far higher profile cases, compared to more numerous, lower profile cases in other countries, which introduces a significant element of geographic bias in reporting. Moreover, the following list greatly over-represents countries where information on such activities is more readily publicized.
Chile
In the second half of the 20th century, a number of countries in South America used torture, notably the regime of Augusto Pinochet in Chile in the 1970s.
France
During the Algerian war of 1955-1962, the French military used torture against the National Liberation Front, which struggled for the independence of Algeria using force (bombings etc.). Paul Aussaresses, a French general in charge of intelligence services the Algerian war, defended the use of torture in a 2000 interview in the Paris newspaper Le Monde. In an interview on the CBS newsmagazine 60 Minutes, in response to the question of whether he would torture Al-Qaeda suspects, his answer was, "It seems to me it's obvious."
Germany
In 2002, in Cologne, Germany, a history of physical torture at Eigelstein police station only came to light because the victim died, and a post-mortem examination unearthed the facts. Further investigation revealed that the police officers obviously had resorted to physical mistreatment of suspects for quite some time, and none of them reported the mistreatment.
Israel
Israel has used torture since at least the 1970s, but it was only in 1987 the Israeli Supreme Court formed a special commission headed by retired Justice Moshe Landau, to review the whole question of torture. In their report they sanctioned the use of "moderate physical pressure".
After investigation of continued allegations of torture, there was a 1999 Supreme Court ruling that all torture - even moderate physical pressure - was illegal. This decision was praised by human-rights organizations. Despite this reform of the law, certain actions tantamount to torture were still not completely prohibited in Israel. Amnesty International continues to express concerns to Israel about treatment which amounts to torture, and remains unhappy about the steps taken by Israel to eliminate torture. Amnesty International stated in 2002:
-
'...the Israeli HCJ in September 1999 banned a number of interrogation methods ...However the judgment left ... loopholes by which methods amounting to torture or other ill-treatment in detention may continue.'[[1]]
The human rights group B'Tselem estimated that 85% of all Palestinian detainees are tortured. The methods allegedly include prolonged sleep deprivation; prolonged sight deprivation ; forced, prolonged maintenance of body positions that grow increasingly painful: confinement in tiny, closet-like spaces; exposure to temperature extremes, such as in deliberately overcooled rooms; prolonged toilet and hygiene deprivation; and degrading treatment, such as forcing detainees to eat and use the toilet at the same time. Beatings are allegedly common.
Suspected Hizbollah guerrillas, their families and Lebanese civilian internees were previously detained in the Army prison at Khiam in the then Israeli-occupied Southern Lebanon. Torture, including electric shock torture, was routine.This was detailed after the end of the occupation in 2000, when Lebanese who freed the prisoners found instruments of torture. [2] [3]
An unofficial facility called Unit 1391 is often claimed to be the place where prisoners are tortured. [4] [5]
Saudi Arabia
Saudi Arabia officially considers torture illegal under Islamic Law; however, it is widely practiced, as in the case of William Sampson.
Singapore
Singapore prescribes certain legal criminal punishments such as caning, considered by many to be a form of torture because of the permanent scarring and severe pain it causes for its victims.
Soviet Union
Torture was widely practiced in the Soviet Union to extract confessions from suspects, especially in case of alleged plots against the security of the state or alleged collaboration with "imperialist powers".
Spain
Although officially illegal, torture in Spain continues to be used by police forces at various levels as a means to extract confessions or as punishment. Reported occurrences of torture usually involve people detained under anti-terrorist legislation, and immigrants, both asylum seekers and resident immigrants accused of common crimes or immigration offences.
Spanish authorities consistently fail to implement recomendations by the Council of Europe's Committee for the Prevention of Torture and the UN Committee Against Torture to combat the use of torture in detention. The UN committee expressed its concern "about the length of judicial procedures and made reference to reports that indicated that five years had sometimes passed between crime and sentence. The Committee warned that this problem reduces the effect of penal action and discourages people to file complaints." It further indicated that "All members of the Committee were also deeply concerned about the legal practice of five days incommunicado detention." (since October 2003, a reform of the Criminal Procedure Code has extended that period to a maximum of 13 days).
References:
United Kingdom
In 1978 in the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) trial "Ireland v. the United Kingdom" the facts were not in dispute and the judges court published the following in their judgement:
- These methods, sometimes termed "disorientation" or "sensory deprivation" techniques, were not used in any cases other than the fourteen so indicated above. It emerges from the Commission's establishment of the facts that the techniques consisted of ...wall-standing; hooding; subjection to noise; deprivation of sleep; deprivation of food and drink.
These were referred to by the court as the five techniques. The court ruled:
- 167. ... Although the five techniques, as applied in combination, undoubtedly amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment, although their object was the extraction of confessions, the naming of others and/or information and although they were used systematically, they did not occasion suffering of the particular intensity and cruelty implied by the word torture as so understood. ...
-
168. The Court concludes that recourse to the five techniques amounted to a practice of inhuman and degrading treatment, which practice was in breach of [the ] Article 3 (art. 3).
The ECHR case was a ruling on British policy before the "Parker report" which was published on March 2 1972 and had found the five techniques to be illegal under domestic law:
- 10. Domestic Law ...(c) We have received both written and oral representations from many legal bodies and individual lawyers from both England and Northern Ireland. There has been no dissent from the view that the procedures are illegal alike by the law of England and the law of Northern Ireland. ... (d) This being so, no Army Directive and no Minister could lawfully or validly have authorized the use of the procedures. Only Parliament can alter the law. The procedures were and are illegal."
On the same day (March 2 1972), the United Kingdom Prime Minister Edward Heath stated in the House of Commons that the techniques would not be used in future as an aid to interrogation. As foreshadowed in the Prime Minister's statement, directives expressly prohibiting the use of the techniques, whether singly or in combination, were then issued to the security forces by the Government These are still in force and the use of such methods by UK security forces would not be condoned by the Government.
The Guildford Four and Birmingham Six claimed they were tortured by anti-terrorism police into confessing to IRA bombings. If they were, it appears not to have been authorised by the British government and it would show the unreliable nature of information extracted by torture.
On February 23 2005, British soldiers were found guilty of abuse of Iraqi prisoners arrested for looting at a British Army camp called Bread Basket, in Basra, during May 2003. The judge at the military court, Judge Advocate Michael Hunter, said of photographs and the soldier's behaviour:
- Anyone with a shred of human decency would be revolted by what is contained in those pictures. The actions of you and those responsible for these acts have undoubtedly tarnished the international reputation of the British Army and, to some extent, the British nation too, and it will no doubt hamper the efforts of those who are now risking their lives striving to achieve stability in the Gulf region, and it will probably be used by those who are working against such ends.
At the court martial, the prosecution alleged that in giving the order to "work [the prisoners] hard" Captain Dan Taylor had broken the Geneva Conventions. Neither Taylor, or his commanding officer Lt-Col Paterson, (who was briefed on the operation "Ali Baba", by Taylor), were sanctioned, and indeed, during the period of time between the offence and the trial, both were given promotions. All the leaders of the major British political parties condemned the abuse. Tony Blair British Prime Minister and leader of the Labour Party declared that the pictures were "shocking and appalling". After sentencing, the Chief of the General Staff, General Sir Mike Jackson, made a statement on television and said that: he was "appalled and disappointed" when he first saw photographs of the Iraqi detainees and that
- The incidents depicted are in direct contradiction to the core values and standards of the British Army ... Nevertheless, in the light of the evidence from this trial I do apologize on behalf of the army to those Iraqis who were abused and to the people of Iraq as a whole.
(The Independent [6] [7] [8] , BBC: Judge says 'put aside sympathy'. Court martial photos)
United States
In 2003 and 2004 there was substantial controversy over the "stress and duress" methods that were used in the U.S.'s war on terrorism, that had been sanctioned by the U.S. Executive branch of government at Cabinet level [9]. Similar methods in 1978 were ruled by ECHR to be inhuman and degrading treatment, but not torture, when used by the UK in the early 1970s in Northern Ireland.
CIA agents have anonymously confirmed to the Washington Post in a December 26, 2002 report that the CIA routinely uses so-called "stress and duress" interrogation techniques, which are claimed by some human rights activists to be acts of torture, in the US-led war on terrorism. These sources state that CIA and military personnel beat up uncooperative suspects, confine them in cramped quarters, duct tape them to stretchers, and use other restraints which maintain the subject in an awkward and painful position for long periods of time. The phrase 'torture light' has been reported in the media and has been taken to mean acts that would not be legally defined as torture. Techniques similar to "stress and duress" were used by the UK in the early 1970s and were ruled to be "inhuman and degrading treatment" but not torture by the European Court of Human Rights. While this is in no way binding on the United States, it is seen as indicative of the state of international law on what constitutes torture.
The Post article continues that sensory deprivation, through the use of hoods and spraypainted goggles, sleep deprivation, and selective use of painkillers for at least one captive who was shot in the groin during his apprehension are also used. The agents also indicate in the report that the CIA as a matter of course hands suspects over to foreign intelligence services with far fewer qualms about torture for more intensive interrogation. [The act of handing somebody to another organization or country, from outside that country, where it is foreseeable that torture would occur is a violation of the Torture Convention.] The Post reported that one US official said, "If you don't violate someone's human rights some of the time, you probably aren't doing your job." The US Government denies that torture is being conducted in the detention camps at Guantanamo Bay.
Allegations emerged that in the Allied occupation of Iraq after the second Gulf war, there was extensive use of torture techniques, allegedly supported by American military intelligence agents, in Iraqi jails such as Abu Ghraib and others.
There has been a lack of denial in official circles that America uses third party states to carry out Torture by proxy to obtain intelligence: it is alleged that terror suspects are arbitrarily and illegally arrested, then transferred to other countries to be interrogated and often tortured. This practice is seen as ironic, given America's strong emphasis on the values of freedom and self-determination.
In 2002, Canadian citizen Maher Arar was arrested and deported to Syria, where he claims he was tortured. As of October 2004, Congress is considering "the 9/11 Recommendations Implementation Act" which would empower the Secretary for Homeland Security to deport non-US citizens without review.
In June 2004, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and the New York Times obtained copies of legal analyses prepared for the CIA and the Justice Department in 2002 which developed a legal basis for the use of torture by US interrogators if acting under the directive of the President of the United States. The legal definition of torture by the Justice Department narrowed to actions which "must be equivalent in intensity to the pain accompanying serious physical injury, such as organ failure, impairment of bodily function, or even death", and argued that actions that inflict moderate or fleeting pain do not necessarily constitute torture. Based on these legal analyses, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld later approved in 2003 the use of 24 classified interrogation techniques for use on detainees at Guantanamo Bay which after use on one prisoner were withdrawn. It is the position of the United States government that the legal memoranda constitute only permissible legal research and do not signify the intent of the United States to use torture which it opposes. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has complained about this prominent newspaper coverage and its implications. [10]
Uzbekistan
In 2003, Britain's Ambassador for Uzbekistan, Mr. Craig Murray made accusations that information was being extracted under extreme torture from dissidents in that country, and that the information was subsequently being used by Britain and other western, democratic countries which disapproved of torture.
See also
External links
Last updated: 05-21-2005 05:31:10
