Introduction
Torture is a process by which anguish, suffering and pain whether mental or physical is deliberately inflicted on an individual for the purpose of confession, punishment or obtaining vital information from the victim. According to “International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims” there are several debates on whether to classify torture as whether unusual or cruel punishment. Basically, the society believes that capital punishment is inhumane and unacceptable. Nevertheless, in United States torturing an enemy is no longer considered inhumane or cruel especially when it comes to the safety of the nation and the American society (Cynthia, 2015). The work would analyze whether torturing high-value targets or enemy combatants violates standards of morality in the American free society. The work will go further to establish whether the act of torture violates the basic human rights and whether it would have global implications and further find out whether torture may be justified under ontological, deontological, natural law, utilitarianism theory.
Torture and the Enemy
In its attempt to fight the act of terrorism, United States as a country has go ahead to violate both international and domestic laws barring torturing of combatants enemies. Torture is considered to be illegal in United States. Nonetheless, according to “The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel,” and “Amnesty International 2013,” the law was violated in order to make some torture practices in United States seem legal to both domestic and international criminals (Lendman, 2008). After the 9/11 attack by the Al Qaeda terrorists which resulted into the death of about 3000 American citizen, torture of the high-value enemy became acceptable in the American constitution as long as the torture would not lead to permanent disability or death of the victim.
According to the American constitution amendments, the attacks by the terrorists against the American society would basically amount to torture of the victim as constituted in the American act of war. The act or torture was declared during the Bush administration as using procedures and laws to the victim which are no longer applied during times of peace. Torture in the American society was adopted was deemed necessary in attempt to obtain vital information from the enemy in rescue of the American society from terrorism attack (Fieser, 2010). Since 2002, the “Center for Constitution Rights,” President Bush administration justified torture of enemy combatants as their rights are no longer guaranteed in the Geneva Convection. Nevertheless, there are mixed reactions and views from American and international society in regard to the torture of the enemy combatant.
Whether the act of torture violate basic human rights and global implication
Basically, the act of torture to the victims does not guarantee that the society and individuals would be better in the future. Torture violates the basic human rights of the victims under which the sovereign laws and rights are founded. The law of the land as constituted provides of any little authority to infringe the right of an individual liberty for the good of the general public. The little liberty of infringement of the victims right should therefore not go beyond death as no one has the right to kill the other. There is no right under any domestic or international laws which guarantee the right to kill. Capital punishment as per say should be guarantee if it is useful for the general public. Despite the belief that capital punishment of torture combat future attack or violence, individuals judgment is usually adopted through their minds rather than through their habits. Torture is harmful to the society due to the cruelty it presents. The law is supposed to taught the society how to protect and respect life of other individuals however the war on terror through the law and torture goes ahead to teach the society how to shed blood or torture other members of the society. According to The religious point of view, life is considered to be holy and no one has the power to take another person’s life apart from God. Therefore, despite the fact that the victim might have infringed the rights of the society, the law should not go ahead and infringe to him or her capital punishment through torture. The society should understand that torturing an individual is violation of human rights as it is regarded to be an act of retaliation (Holzinger, 2013). The process infringes the principle of equality which calls for observation of the scale of justice which every individual would like to be exposed upon. Hence, based upon the fundamental principles of jurisprudence of the land, capital punishment or torture should only be allowed if the action of the victim violated the rights of the whole society. Nevertheless, torture violates basic human rights and could have global implications of retaliation. Once citizens from a different countries are exposed to capital punishment their home country may end up revenging and as a result continued retaliation might be experienced.
Whether torture might be justified under ethical theories
Ontology principle is the study of reality, existence, becoming, nature of being and the basic categories of relations and being. The principle is against capital punishment or torture because it goes beyond infringing individual’s liberty and freedom (Cynthia, 2015). It is the role of the law to protect liberty and human rights of every citizen. Hence, according to the theory nobody in the society should go ahead to torture the other as is against human rights and religion. The law should therefore establish all in the society rather than others.
Deontological theory is an ethical principle which focuses on the wrongness or rightness of the actions. It is concerned with the actions of individuals instead of the actions consequences. Therefore, the theory do support torture because given the victim do engage into torture of the society, the society on the other hand should go ahead to infringe torture against these individuals in order for them to act as role model for other in the society in shunning away from evil deeds (Fieser, 2010). The act of torture calls for obedience to the moral laws by the society and those who disobey the established laws should be punished according to the existing laws.
Utilitarianism theory is a doctrine which suggests that actions are right if they promote happiness or are beneficial to the majority in the society. Based on this principle, torture is therefore justified to an individual in order to ensure that the society is free from harmful individuals and that the society should learn from the few engaging in criminal activities (Cynthia, 2015). As long as torture is inflicted to an individuals in order to protect and safe others from destruction and harm, the law should be allowed to take it cause by infringing torture to the victim of terror or terrorism.
In conclusion, according to natural law it is unnatural to infringe torture to the society of individuals since it violates the natural and human rights (Fieser, 2010). The natural claims that the torture only defies the natural human dignity of the victims. Whenever the victims are infringed into torture so that they offer vital information in regard to their crimes, the law breaches their private right and liberty as they are supposed to do so through natural situation and freedom. According to the theory, only God who has the right to torture human being but no human has the right to torture the other as it is ungodly.
References
Fieser, J. (2010). Classic Philosophers on the Death Penalty. 4th Edition. New York Publishers.
Lendman, S. (2008) Torture as Official United States Policy: Crimes against Humanity, Law and Justice. Cambridge university press.
