The war on terror and the weakening distaste for torture

Topic is discussed by experts from several countries in the book Torture in the Age of Human Rights.

By Karina Toledo

Agência FAPESP – One of the many side effects of the war on terror that followed the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States was the breakdown of international consensus against the practice of torture that had been gaining strength the world over – at least at the level of official discourse – since the end of WWII.

In some countries considered to be leaders in the defense of human rights, total condemnation of the practice gave way to its consideration in the name of security. Theorists returned to discussing topics such as which methods could be characterized as torture, who could and could not be tortured, and which situations of risk would justify such acts.

Some of the principal voices that have been raised in the international debate against loosening the ban on “enhanced interrogation techniques” are gathered together in the book Tortura na Era dos Direitos Humanos (Torture in the Age of Human Rights), published by Editora da Universidade de São Paulo (Edusp) in March.

Edited by Nancy Cardia and Roberta Astolfi, researchers of the University São Paulo (USP), the work is the fruit of a 2008 seminar held by the Center for the Study of Violence (NEV), a Research, Innovation, and Dissemination Center (RIDC) funded by FAPESP.

“Expectations were high in the international scenario at the time we organized the event because the George Bush administration was ending and Barack Obama was coming into power in the United States. The expectation was that those who had abused their power during the Bush administration would be punished. However, nothing like that happened, which – to the frustration of many – makes the workshop’s discussion extremely relevant. The rupture of the consensus against torture after 2001 was a setback for human rights, and since that time, no process of healing has been put in place,” explained Cardia, vice-coordinator of the NEV.

According to Cardia, it remains impossible to measure the consequences of this rupture – which occurred in countries with strong democracies that serve as models for other countries – on nations such as Brazil, where torture was never completely eliminated by the police or widely renounced by the public.

Cardia noted that Brazil ratified the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in 1989. In 1997, torture was legally defined as a crime after the disclosure of scenes depicting police violence in the Favela Naval in Diadema, São Paulo.

“In the last 29 years of civil government, there has been much debate about the subject. Brazil has opened its doors for inspection by special rapporteurs and created instruments such as ‘dial torture’ [a telephone service instituted by the Special Secretariat of Human Rights of the President of the Republic to handle complaints about crimes and human rights violations]. However, we’ve been unable to actually change police practices,” Cardia explained.

Whereas in the international context, the use of torture is discussed in extreme situations where lives are at stake and against individuals who do not share the same citizenship as the torturers, in Brazil, the violent resource is used by agents of the government against its own people and in cases of common crimes to obtain evidence that police could obtain in other ways, Cardia explained.

“Studies conducted by NEV in the city of São Paulo every two years since 2001 show that the public’s approval regarding the use of actions defined as torture under Brazilian law has grown. And it is growing mainly among young people, which is somewhat surprising. Our feeling was that things could get worse once the discussion about fighting terrorism was raised in the international context. We organized the workshop for the purpose of bringing together experts who had been involved in extensive discussions about the topic and encouraging reflection,” Cardia explained.

The USP event brought together philosophers, sociologists, anthropologists, social scientists, psychologists, historians, human rights activists, and professionals who support victims of torture. The presentations and the discussions that followed gave rise to the articles that make up the publication.

The introduction, which divides the text into four general themes, is by Astolfi and Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro, a NEV researcher and president of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry for Syria (established by the United Nations in 2011), a member of the Brazilian Truth Commission, former Special Secretary of Human Rights, and one of the organizers of the National Human Rights Program.

In the first part of the book, authors such as Henry Shue (University of Oxford, United Kingdom), Martha Huggins (Tulane University, United States), William Scheuerman (Indiana University, United States), Jessica Wolfendale (West Virginia University, United States), and Dinah PoKempner (Humans Rights Watch) discuss the redefinition of the concept of torture and the appearance of euphemisms that attempt to dissemble the practice or characterize it in relative terms.

Yuval Ginbar (Amnesty International), Fritz Allhoff (Western Michigan University, United States), and David Rodin (University of Oxford) discuss the possibility of allowing torture in extreme cases and in so-called “time-bomb situations,” where time is ticking and lives are at stake.

In the third part, David DeBatto (retired US Army counterintelligence agent), Jean Maria Arrigo (Coalition for an Ethical Psychology, United States), and Henrik Ronsbo (Rehabilitation and Research Centre for Torture Victims, Denmark) present actual cases to question the effectiveness of torture as an investigation technique, discuss the consequences of the practice for both individuals and groups, and address the strategic errors committed by anti-torture organizations.

Dedicated to including the Brazilian scenario in the international discussion, the final part brings together – in addition to the book’s editors – authors such as Roy King (University of Cambridge, United Kingdom), Fernando Salla (NEV-USP), Mariana Joffily (Federal University of Santa Catarina), Maria Gorete Marques de Jesus (NEV-USP), and Mariana Thorstensen Possas (Monitoring Committee of the São Paulo State Program on Human Rights).

“Most foreign authors try to deconstruct the arguments in support of torture. They seek to respond to theorists who hold that the practice might not be as repulsive depending on the degree of severity of the context and the risk involved. It is a very interesting logical, philosophical, and political exercise and offers a wide range of reasoning styles. In the Brazilian section, we try to offer basic information to activists and public policy makers so that they can conduct more sophisticated analyses and perhaps come up with more effective measures,” said Cardia.

• Tortura na Era dos Direitos Humanos (Torture in the Age of Human Rights)
  Editors: Nancy Cardia and Roberta Astolfi
  Release: March 2014
  Price: R$ 67
  Pages: 480
  Additional Information: www.edusp.com.br/detlivro.asp?ID=413810