Why torture works

Anything said under duress is inherently unreliable. Even tactically, let alone morally, this is a problem. If someone is screaming that a bomb will go off in a particular location, do you act on that information when they might be simply telling you something, anything, to make the pain stop? Act on the lead and you could miss the real explosion, which the subject of the torture might not know anything about, or waste valuable resources and time.

Courts recognise this and will not admit evidence obtained in such circumstances. This may not bother the interrogators, but it should bother any of their superiors — right up to the commander-in-chief — who hopes to secure an eventual conviction. This supposed conspiracy was eventually found to have been based on an internet article Padilla once read, and was utterly insubstantial.

The argument over whether torture works peaked with the killing of Osama bin Laden in The intelligence that permitted this successful operation originated from multiple streams over more than a decade, and from the work of thousands of analysts. Much of this information was gathered electronically, much came from partners including some that use torture systematically , some came from so-called open sources, and much came from people convinced without physical coercion to give up information.

But there is no conclusive evidence that the torture of al-Qaida suspects such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who was waterboarded dozens of times, was the key element that allowed Bin Laden to be located and killed. Was there any kind of offensive or inappropriate language used in this comment?

Yes, I want to report this user. No, sorry this is a mistake. Thank you! Error We are having trouble saving your comment. Please try again. Start a Debate Would you like to create a debate and share it with the netivist community? Start a debate.

Found a technical issue? Are you experiencing any technical problem with netivist? Please let us know! Tell me more. Help netivist Help netivist continue running free! Follow us on social media:. Your name. Your email. You can type multiple email addresses separated by commas. Close Send. Submit to Reddit. Share on Facebook. Share on Twitter.

Share on Pinterest. Share on LinkedIn. Join with confidence, netivist is completely advertisement free You will not recive any promotional materials from third parties. This argument assumes that you have the right person in custody, it assumes that this person actually has the information you need, it assumes that there isn't a better way of getting hold of the evidence, and above all it assumes that torture is an effective way of getting that information.

One of the interesting features of the torture debate is that many in the military and intelligence communities seem decidedly unconvinced about the effectiveness of torture.

Ali Soufan, a former FBI special agent with considerable experience interrogating al-Qaeda operatives, pointed out in Time that :. When they are in pain, people will say anything to get the pain to stop.

Most of the time, they will lie, make up anything to make you stop hurting them. That means the information you're getting is useless.

He isn't alone in this assessment — a number of former intelligence people have expressed similar views, and his words are echoed by the US Army Training Manual's section on interrogation , which suggests that:. The situation is further clouded by the fact that members of the George W. Bush administration made claims for the effectiveness of torture that have later been proven to be untrue. One such claim was that the water-boarding simulated drowning of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed produced vital information that allowed them to break up a plot to attack the Liberty Tower in Los Angeles in Slight problem - in Shaikh Mohammed was busy evading capture in Pakistan.

But enough anecdotes, let's look at the science. Why wouldn't torture be effective? Actually there are many reasons. Let's assume that we have the right guy, and that he does in fact know the information that we need. Torture methods, such as sham executions, rape, sexual assaults, humiliation and sleep deprivation often leave physical consequences on affected persons such as chronic pain in certain parts of body and inability to lead a healthy and prolonged lifestyle.

For this reason, people who had been affected by torture should have access to redress such as medical care, reintegration into society, rehabilitation and counseling. When states and governments use torture to achieve their goals, they often see it as necessary to provide some type of justification for its implementation.

Governments and politicians must find ways to excuse and explain the use of torture, while those who publicly advocate for it must find arguments that would justify torture as a practice that is globally and universally regarded as immoral and condemned. The prohibition of torture is enshrined in many conventions and declarations within the international human rights and humanitarian law.

Similarly, it was established by the Geneva Conventions and the Additional Protocols that serious violations of international humanitarian law, including torture and other inhuman treatment, constitute war crimes in both international and non-international armed conflicts. As already mentioned, perhaps the most significant international law instrument used to combat torture is the Convention Against Torture, or the CAT.

Most of countries in the world have signed and ratified the CAT and other international human rights treaties and conventions. Inflicting torture on someone does not end without consequences. Both international and national law instruments oblige countries and governments to search for persons suspected to have committed torture acts and bring them before justice. Countries have a duty to enact legislation that prohibits acts of torture and other forms of ill-treatment and punish those who commit them and those who order them to be committed.

Individual perpetrators, thus, can be held criminally responsible for committing these crimes. According to the Article 4 of the CAT, all countries must ensure that all acts of torture are regarded as offences under their criminal law, including attempts to commit torture and any acts by any person that constitute participation or complicity of torture.

States are obliged to punish these acts in an appropriate manner, as well as to establish jurisdiction over the acts of torture where the offences are committed in any territory under their jurisdiction, or where the alleged offender or the victim is a national of the country.

Additionally, countries are obliged to search for persons suspected to have committed acts of torture and make torture an extraditable offence in any extradition treaty they sign with other country. As already mentioned, torture methods are ineffective interrogation tool and evidence extracted from torture cannot be used as evidence. Under Article 15 of the CAT, any statement made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any proceeding, unless it is used against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made.