Introduction
The United Nations (UN), Universal Declaration of Human Rights on Torture, the conference of Countries held to discuss Human rights abuses, was held in February 1985.This conference passed a convention and was opened to be adopted by the countries present at the conference. The gathering came to agreement to ban the use of torture and formed a committee called the “UN committee against Torture”.
The committee was to involve countries to take effective actions to prevent abuse as a result of torture within their boundaries. The convention also passed a resolution to forbid countries to return a refugee to their nation because it is believed that they will be tortured. “It also obliges the country to respect the human rights accord of other nations before making any decision on torture” (Goldberg 14).
Thesis Statement
Every nation is required to train its law forces, i.e. the police and the military on the human right policies which were the United Nations on the torture in their jurisdiction and to investigate any allegations brought forward when their law enforcers have been implicated on human right abuses. The law of the country must allow persons tortured in any form to be permitted to make an official complaint and investigation to be started on the credibility of the person. If the credibility of that person is right, compensation should be given, that includes full treatment and payment to the victim.This accord also does not allow any activities that will allow the use of torture. As a result of these human rights abuses we should not concentrate too much on the punishment of torture perpetrators, these perpetrators are using torture to help uphold the security of a country and above all terrorists are inhuman.
Water boarding is a form of torture that involves tying down a suspect who is believed to have credible information that can help a country. “The suspect’s face is tied with a cloth and he is stimulated to a sensation of drowning using water. In Spain this kind of torture has been used for many years but now it is a subjected to war-crime trial” (Goldberg 3).
Accepted use of torture
There are situation in which the use of torture is morally accepted. The use of torture is unconstitutional in the US but surely if the lives of innocent America citizen are at risks, we must overlook the constitution. If the millions innocent lives will perish as a result of terrorist?
Let’s give an example, a terrorist has planted an explosive on an airline and he alone knows how to disarm the explosive. The government cannot yield for the terrorist demands. If need arises we can use any form of torture to extortionist and save the passengers because the passengers in the airline did not ask their lives to be put in danger because the death of this innocent lives will hunt us as a nation.
If the rights of an individual terrorist is more important to be safe guided, then we must put into perspective the lives of the innocent which must be saved at any price, even if inflicting pain on the terrorist that has put the lives of innocent people in danger. The idealism of a terrorist is, if he threat to kill innocent victims by doing this he give up his civilized standards and he cannot complain if law enforcers tries to get information from him through torture. He already knows his actions and he risk death unlike his innocent victims.
There is no way the US will lose his way when they choose to use torture to retrieve information from terrorist suspects. Pain is one way of preserving order in a country. In near future terrorist group will threaten millions of lives in the world and the use of torture will be used to save those lives. It is high times the world stop criticism on the use of waterboarding and start thinking about its importance. Further more if the perpetrator of torture victims are persecuted, “this will this will expose the officials in other countries suspected to be mastermind of abuse in other countries like in Iraq where the US officials have been accused by human rights activist” (Goldberg 34).
Accounting for Torture Abuses
The immunity law and the torture victim protection Act which was passed 20 years ago by congress is null and void if the perpetrator of this torture are not brought to justice because it says nothing about an individual being given immunity status. “If this is the basis of US government not persecuting it official involved in torture abuses, this would be null and void” (Miller 12).
Let’s take the example of Bashe Yusuf a plaintiff of Somali origin. In the early 80’s he was doing volunteer work with others to clean up hospitals in various places in Somalia. He was arrested together with fellow volunteers, detained and torture for months-subjected to water boarded. After his released from prison was given asylum in the US. Now he is suing the then prime minister Samantar who is in the US as an asylum. Yusuf said, “He want the man to be accountable for this crime he committed and not that he was doing this because he fear for his life”. It outrageous for people like samatar to live peacefully in the US while innocent people suffered under his watch when he was prime minister.
Similar account can be applied in the US; citizens of the US need a full account of all the abuses that occurred under the Bush administrations. Those officials involved, and who facilitated the use of waterboarding to their victims should be brought to book, so as to prevent such human rights violations from occurring again. A Tribunal is needed for people who were involved in these severe crimes, so as to bring back America’s influence in international affairs and to suit the demands of fair dealing, on the use of water boarding such as in the Guantanamo bay and other form of torture elsewhere in the world.Waterboading has greatly damaged the country “moral standing” on torture, as also terrorist around the world are using these actions as a tool to recruit new members. “The US government may use waterboarding as a means to protect its citizens but this is a hindrance to international cooperation on human rights” (Miller 108).
Conclusion
Waterboarding is inhuman and does not respect the human right of a person. Any security apparatus of a nation should be subjected to its laws and also that of set by the U.N. on human rights abuses. This should be followed by the U.S In order to show that it is not party to all forms of suffering and any other inhuman or any punishments that a person will suffer. It is not sufficient to comment on it, but also actions should be taken that will demonstrate that the government is seriously fighting any forms of torture and this will make other countries respect the policies set out by the U.S government.
Works Cited
Goldberg, Elizabeth. Beyond terror, gender, narrative, human rights. London: Rutgers University Press, (2007).Print.
Goldberg, Karen. The torture debate in america. London: Cambridge University Press. (2005). Print.
Miller, Fredric. Waterboarding in the 21st century. New York: Alphascript Publishing, (2009).Print.