Criminal Justice
Your Module 5 writing assignment will be written in Help write my thesis – APA format (double-spaced; Arial, Times New Roman style font; 12 pt. font size) and should be at least three (3) to five (5) pages of text excluding the Title Page, Abstract, and References page. You are to develop a responsive, thoughtful and constructive paper directly dealing with the topic below:
What if more severe forms of torture were necessary to save thousands of citizens? Would it be justified in that type of circumstance? Have previous methods of “enhanced interrogation” led to increased violence among terrorists? Support your claims with at least three (3) citations from peer reviewed journal articles.
Abstract
The use of the severe forms of torture has always been considered morally unjustified as it goes beyond the limits set out by human rights. It has been indicated that torture needs to be banned. Nonetheless, certain circumstances have called for its use. These circumstances entail protecting and saving the lives of masses of blameless people. The interrogative technique has proven to be effective in gaining important information from the suspects, thus thwarting many grave incidences that would cost lives. Notably, the use of enhanced interrogation techniques in the United States illustrates its importance as the enforcement individuals got more information about further attacks that were being planned on American society. The use of torture should e the last resort taken by the authorities when all other movies have proven unsuccessful.
Can Severe Forms of Torture Ever Be Justified?
Whether there is a need to have an absolute prohibition against torture or whether some carefully specified circumstances make torture a lesser evil and thus justifiable has continuously been discussed. These special circumstances that make torturing a suspect a lesser evil will typically entail seeking information from the latter to prevent a greater evil to prevent greater menaces in the society.
The position of moral absolution indicates that individuals ate to do things only when they are right instead of calculating the consequences to their actions (Evans, 2012). This position does condemn torture as an acceptable practice since any forms of torture or abuse contrast to the whole concept of human rights and hence should be banned. Human rights have defined the kinits that a government should not surpass, and if they breach is due to the utilitarian calculus. They are coming close to justify the end-justifies-the means rationale mostly used in terrorist attacks. This society chooses to reject torture puts an affirmation on essential dignity and humanity for each person completely. Torture does dehumanize individuals as it treats them as pawns who are to be manipulated through a painful experience, which makes it morally unjustified (Evans, 2012).
Nonetheless, when it comes to saving thousands of citizens, torture would become morally defensible but not justifiable. A formal and absolute prohibition on torture encompasses it having no exceptions to it. This position is pragmatically unrealistic and very unsound in its normative level. Currently, torture is still widely used despite the absolute ban on it. Countries across the world are still violating the Geneva Accords prohibiting torture and will do it secretly and hypothetically (Bagaric & Clarke, 2004). This is because sometimes it is deemed very necessary when the enforcement agencies want to save people’s lives. Most of the suspects are extremely hardcore that getting any information from them can be extremely difficult. While it is best that torture is completely not used as it is not pragmatically desirable, it is morally defensible, especially when one considers the harm minimization rationale. A civilized community will not condone any forms of torture, but certain circumstances will deem it morally defensible. These circumstances will entail more grace harm that could be avoided if torture is utilized as an interrogation tactic. It is important that analysts move from the question of whether torture is ever defensible to questioning whether it is morally permissible. Real-life will present scenarios that approach a greater level of desperation such as that of saving thousands of citizens torture becomes a sharp end of conduct that encompasses sacrificing the interests of one agent by inflicting harm on them to reduce the greater level of harm that could occur to a large number of individuals who are blameless (Bagaric & Clarke, 2004)s. The debate that insists on a blanket [prohiboitioon against torture is illogical and should turn to the circumstance that would deem it morally appropriate.
Furthermore, one benefit of utilizing torture as an investigation tactic is that it has proven to be an excellent method to gather information (Bagaric & Clarke, 2004). Human beings are vulnerable in that they will do anything to avoid pain regardless of how short they are. A human being will most likely comply with the torturer’s demands to prevent any sports of pain such that even the threat of torture will evoke cooperation. At the time, torture is considered a means of interrogation. The investigators will normally have exhausted all forms of tactics to gain the right information, or even the suspect may give them false information that does not amount to anything substantial. Yet, the lives of many could be at risk. In this case, inflicting pain under the supervision of medical professionals and having warned the suspect could be implemented. Many investigators would find that the tactics helped in getting the required information, and this could be used in trying to save thousands of citizens.
Have previous methods of “enhanced interrogation” led to increased violence among terrorists?
The use of enhanced interrogation techniques would be conducted in the United States between 2002 and 2009 after being authorized by Bush’s Administration and the Department of Justice. At the time, 119 detained would be under CIA’s custody, and over 39 if-then would be subjected to the techniques. Enhanced interrogation techniques included torture and inhuman or degrading treatment towards them, which could cause both physical and psychological effects. These forms of methods would lead to the global terrorist groups known as the Islamic State to seize on the torture program and publicly disclosed it as a recruitment and a propaganda tool (Center for Ethics and the Rule of Law (CERL) Report, 2017). The groups labeled the country as a terrorist state for these inhuman behaviors.
Notably, the atrocities that had been committed by the Islamic state and groups did surpass the operations of the United States, about the propaganda that ensued on the use of these techniques undermined the country’s credibility. It was indicated that a return to the harsh interrogations and detentions would be opening an opportunity for further reprisals on behalf of other state or non-state adversaries as they gained legitimacy under the global norms. Therefore, the use of enhanced interrogation techniques resulted in increased propaganda among the terrorists as they tried to have the country stop using those techniques. These events were considered to put the country at the same level as the terrorist groups for violating human rights. It is these debates that led to an increased call or the banning of enhanced interrogation techniques. They were seen to cause more violence than what the enforcement agencies were trying to fight.
Notably, these techniques helped the investigators to learn more about the planned terrorist attacks on the United States. The investigators indicated that using the low-level suspects’ techniques provided information that could guide in questioning the high-level suspects (National Security Council Information, 2016). In this process, they were in a position to gain more information and ensure that the enforcement agencies remain vigilant to protect American citizens. After the terrorist attack that happened in September 2011 was the most severe that the country faced. From that time, the country was forced to move into the Middle Eastern countries to fight terrorist attacks from their origins. It is in these regions where several American soldiers have been harmed or died due to the retaliation done by these terrorist organizations.
References
Bagaric, M., & Clarke, J. (2004). Not Enough Official Torture in the World-The Circumstances in Which Torture Is Morally Justifiable. USFL, Rev., 39, 581.
Center for Ethics and the Rule of Law (CERL) Report. (2017). The Ethics of Interrogation and the Rule of Law. Retrieved from https://www.law.upenn.edu/live/files/6299-final-version-abridged–ethics-of-interrogation
Evans, R. (2012). The ethics of torture. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies.
National Security Council Information. (2016). Counterterrorism Detention and Terrorism Activities. Retrieved from https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/0005856717.pdf
