Terrorism And Human Rights: Use Of Force As A Response To Terrorism

 


                                     

TOPIC: - Terrorism And Human Rights: Use Of Force As A Response To Terrorism

BY:  HARSHIKA KAPOOR

LLM-2nd YEAR

ILS, PUNE


TOPIC: - Terrorism And Human Rights: Use Of Force As A Response To Terrorism

 

 

ABSTRACT

Every person is entitled to avail the basic human rights, on a simple pretext of he being a human being and that being such, he has a rightful claim upon the said rights. Human rights treaties and other key international legal instruments have also acknowledged this idea. Despite the fact that human rights are, on the whole, subject to derogation in light of the needs of the time, there are some rights that simply cannot be derogated. In the eyes of international bodies and organisations, there is no difference between those who engage in terrorist activities and those who claim to be acting against them in order to eradicate them; the violations committed during counter-terrorism operations are just as grave in nature as the acts of terrorism themselves. Therefore even the ‘Counter Terrorism Operations’ are to be discussed upon, apart from the acts of terrorism which are the primary cause of violation of human rights.

In the instant submission, we are going to look into certain aspects of “International Human Rights Law” and understand as to how terrorism adversely affects the International Human Rights Law. Apart from this we are going to analyze the concept of Terrorism, to a greater extent and what does a ‘terrorist act’ mean, under the arena of the International Law. Further we are going to look into the impact of terrorism on the human rights of people globally and that as to how the human rights could be protected while countering terrorist activities. Moreover, we shall ponder over the “Specific Human Rights Challenges in the context of terrorism”. Apart from the abovementioned sub-topics, we shall also be looking into other sub-topics, as and when the need for the same arises.

Here, Doctrinal Approach has been adopted in order to make this project. It would deal with the current scenario and would try to throw some light upon future prospects in relation to this topic by giving certain suggestions.

Key Words-

Counter Terrorism Measures, Derogation, International Humanitarian Law, Terrorism.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

SYNOPSIS

·       Statement of the Problem:-

Terrorism as we all appreciate is a great threat to the human life, which constrains the individual human being to avail and exercise their basic human rights, which they are naturally entitled to get as a human. Terrorism, as defined under the British Terrorism Act, 2000, is any activity which tries to influence the policy of any government, anywhere in the world, including, for example by damaging the public properties. Terrorist act are generally understood to be those acts of violence which adversely affects the life of civilians in a state. Considering the above mentioned definition of a ‘Terrorist Act’, we tend to condemn all sorts of terrorist activities and sympathize with the ones who fight against these acts and thereby prevent the happening of these acts. But, as has already been observed and analysed by the International Organizations, that the human rights violations that take place during the counter terrorism operations, is much more than the act of terrorism itself. This has made no difference amongst those who perform the terrorist activities and the ones who claim to stand against these activities.

·       Survey of existing literature:-

Many thinkers of International law have come forward in order to study the impact of terrorism on the human rights across the globe and to analyze as to how and to what extent the human rights are being violated. In relation to present submission, through articles which dealt with the challenges to the principle of International Human Rights due to terrorism and ways to tackle the same. Moreover, we went through the way the right way to conduct and carry out the counter terrorism operations.

·       Identification of issues:-

In the instant submission, we would be focusing on understanding the link between Terrorism and Human Rights violation in the international arena. In order to analyze the concepts in a proper manner, there is a need to refer to various United Nation’s Conventions in this regard and consider the various recommendations of the United Nations human rights committee. Further, in the present submission, we would be dealing with specific human rights challenges in the context of terrorism.

·       Objective and scope of research:-

The present submission has touched the aspect of International Terrorism and its effects on the International Humanitarian Law. Linking the two, would help us understand as to how the rampant terrorist activities that are taking place are adversely affecting the basic human rights of the people. The main objective behind this research is to highlight the challenges that would arise in the context of terrorism and combating the terrorist activities. Further, to manage the counter terrorist acts is another objective of this research.

·       Research Methodology adopted:-

For this study, we elected to use a doctrinal research approach. Research on a given thesis is being conducted by using logic to an examination of relevant statutes and precedents. Legal reasoning and analytical deduction are used to systematically organise and investigate legal propositions and legal institutions, as well as analyse and organise the results of case studies. Pure theoretical research is another name for this methodology.

·       Probable outcome:-

Probably, by virtue of this article we would be able to analyze the extent to which, terrorist activities are rampant internationally and understand the ways to counter the same, specifically emphasizing upon the conduction of the counter terrorism operations.

·       Tentative Chapterisation:-

a)     The Nature of human rights;

b)    International Human Rights Law;

c)     Terrorism;

d)    Protection of human rights while countering terrorism;

e)     Prescription  by Law;

f)     Specific Human Rights challenges in the context of terrorism;

g)    State Violations;

h)    Conclusion.

 

·       Nature of Human Rights:-

Human rights are the universal values and safeguards that shield individuals and communities from state acts that threaten their most basic liberties and the principles upon which human dignity rests. Since human rights essentially belong to humans and are separate from and indivisible from other rights, it follows that human rights are universal.

Human rights are predicated on the idea that everyone has the right to be treated with respect and dignity without any sort of discrimination. The grant of human rights is based upon the following two principles:-

a)     Firstly that, they are being characterized by being- Inalienable and equally applicable to all, and,

b)    Secondly, the duty to maintain and to make available the very basic rights to every person by virtue their humanity alone.

The idea of bringing the basic human rights to the forefront was just to put a halt to the arbitrary usage of the state power. The human rights can be understood as those rights which can have a bearing on the relationship between the state and the individuals. [1]As far as the bearing upon the relation between the state and individuals is concerned, the basic human rights of the individuals is required to be safeguarded against the arbitrary actions of the state and, on the other hand, the state should strive to achieve a parity among the relation between the individuals themselves, by safeguarding the individual rights from being infringed by other individual.

In today’s scenario, where, protection and promotion of the basic human rights of the people is observed to be one of the duties of the state, it is a step which infact would ensure such safeguard and invite the imposition of a sanction, where any action to safeguard the basic rights is not undertaken.

·       International Human Rights Law:-

Human rights law is concerned with and seeks to defend the rights of all people, whether they are criminals, terrorists, or just regular folks. Considering that fighting terrorism shouldn't interfere with protecting people's human rights, several countries have agreed to adopt measures to do so in accordance with their commitments under international law, international human rights law, or humanitarian law. Certain rights, such as the right to life and freedom from torture, cannot be compromised under any circumstances and must be upheld at all times.

By virtue of the Security Council Resolution of 2003 and other resolutions, it was established that all states should take all steps in combating terrorism in accordance with the obligations of these states under the regime of international law, and the Counter Terrorism Committee (CTC) was established in 2001. To ensure that a person has not taken part in terrorist action, nations must take precautions before awarding refugee status. This step must comply with all applicable laws of domestic and international law, including international human rights norms. In 2004, the UN Security Council established the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED) to collaborate with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. In order to ensure that human rights are protected while countering terrorism, the Directorate was given the responsibility of coordinating with the High Commissioner for Human Rights.

The CTED is mandated to:-

1.     The Committee's duties include: advising the Committee, including for its ongoing dialogue with states on their implementation of resolution 2001;

2.     advising the Committee on the appropriate measures to be taken to implement the provisions of resolution 2005 and observing that such measures are complying with the obligations under the international law; and

3.     liaising with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and, as appropriate, with other human rights organisations.

The abovementioned guidelines shall be adopted in order to prevent the violation of the human rights and to ensure that the universally recognized human rights standards are followed. This is because of the fact that, apart from the terrorist activities, even the counter terrorism policies adopted may restrict the human rights of the individuals.[2]

At international level, “there are two different schools of thought regarding the strategy employed by them to counter terrorism”. One of them being, the British School according to which performance of terrorist acts is equivalent to a crime and therefore it encourages the adoption of measures to control it through local enforcement agencies, on the other hand, there is American School, according to which terrorist acts are equivalent to the war situations and allows the use of military forces to combat.

·       Terrorism:-

In order to understand the relationship between “Terrorism and Human Rights”, it is important for us to understand the meaning of “Terrorism”. As defined under “Section 1 of the British Terrorism Act, 2000 as any activity which is defined to influence the local policies of a particular state government, anywhere in the world, including by, for example, damage to the property”.

Terrorism is generally understood as an act, which creates a feeling of terror among the civilians and civilian populations. Although the term terrorism has not been defined specifically anywhere in any legislation, but it has been made understandable through the usage of different words in a “number of International Treaties and other international and regional instruments”. [3]These treaties and instruments have included a variety of acts which would fall under the ambit of Terrorism. For example- the “General Assembly’s Declarations on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, 1994”, has defined the term “Terrorism” as- “a state where the criminal acts are intended to provoke or incite terror in the minds of the people”. The United Nation General Assembly is currently working towards the adoption of a comprehensive understanding on “Terrorism” which has been defined under its draft Article 2, according to which “Terrorism” is defined as follows:-

“Unlawfully and intentionally causing, attempting or threatening to cause:

a)     Death or serious bodily injury to any person,

b)    Serious damage to public and private property, including the place of public usage as that provided by the local authorities or the government, or

c)     To cause a serious damage to facilities or to property resulting in or likely or likely to result in an economic lossor compelling a government to restrain from adopting a particular policy or to carry out a particular act”.

Now that we have understood the meaning of the term “Terrorism”, it is now pertinent for us to understand about the term “Terrorist Act”. A “Terrorist Act” is said to have been committed when:-

a)     The actions of the terrorist create a sense of fear and insecurity in the minds of the people, or in the minds of any particular section of society, where there is an excessive usage of bombs, dynamites or any other such lethal instrument or fire arms of such sort as to cause death or are likely to cause death of the people, or to cause damage or destruction on a large scale or to prevent the public servants from discharging their lawful duties, or;

b)    The commission of the scheduled offence which has an effect of creating an adverse impact upon the harmony and peace of different sections of the society, or;

c)     Commits an act of gang rape, child molestation or any other offence.

The European Union sees the “Terrorism Acts” as those which aim at:-

a)     Seriously intimidating a population,

b)    Unduly compelling a government or an international organization to do or refrain from doing something,

c)     Seriously destabilizing or destroying the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organization.

These objectives can be achieved through a wide range of illegal acts. They range from attack to individual life to cutting off vital services essential for the survival of the society and other miscellaneous threats like- hijacking, kidnapping and other forms of criminal activity. According to the definition given by the European Union, “Terrorism” is not an ideology or a movement but infact it’s a tactic adopted for the accomplishment of certain goals.

Several conventions have been adopted in recent years to counteract terrorist activities; these accords require states to implement various counterterrorism measures and give legal help. The enforcement of human rights and the fact that many states have been prosecuted for conduct contributing to human rights abuses can be better understood with knowledge of the connection between human rights law and international criminal law.

In view of the foregoing, the question "Does terrorism actually work?" may appear rhetorical, yet this is not the case. Weighing the psychological and emotional effects of terrorism aside, it is important to determine if and to what extent terrorists have been able to influence state policies, or if they have been effective in coercing states to act in a particular way. To begin, it's vital to consider the terrorists' ultimate objectives and the methods they use to carry them out. Terrorists are viewed as too weak to enforce their will directly, therefore they try to persuade their targets that they are more determined and capable of imposing costs on them than they actually are. Here are five long-term aims terrorists have been pursuing through their violence:-

a)     Regime Change;

b)    Territorial Change;

c)     Policy Change;

d)    Status Quo Maintenance;

e)     Maintaining Social Control

And, the strategies through which these goals and objectives are accomplished:-

1)    Attrition,

2)    Intimidation,

3)    Provocation,

4)    Spoiling, and,

5)    Outbidding.

After conducting the necessary research on the strengths and weaknesses of various techniques, the authors in this field came to the conclusion that "Information" is a significant aspect in the success of various terror campaigns. Terrorists need to know how to exactly convey their desire to the people ahead of time, and they need to be well informed on the subject. Success with counterstrategies is also dependent on data. The study also drew a second conclusion, which had to do with the kind of regime that was the target of the terrorist attacks. This analysis led to the conclusion that democracies are more vulnerable to terrorist attacks than other types of governments.

One of the most influential theorists in this area, "Robert Pape," suggested that the weaker actor, the attacker, is the one who causes considerable devastation to the property and other amenities made available by the local authority or the government. Terrorists' readiness to give their own life for their cause is indicative of how seriously they take their mission to destroy. Terrorists, by picking a democracy as their target, are more likely to face a restrained response, because democracies are known for being selective when it comes to the use of force. Acts that are only lightly penalised or not punished at all tend to be repeated. However, it must be noted that terrorists may only be able to successfully coerce governments if they seek the realisation of moderate aims and do not attempt to force states to forsake their critical interests. Terrorist groups are more likely to achieve their goals if they focus on military and political targets and less on the civilian population, according to a study. This is because attacks on civilians are often seen as evidence that terrorists want to wipe out an entire society along with its norms and values, which leads states to respond defensively. Therefore, it has been established that terrorism is a defective means of coercion since attacks on the society and its values are viewed by the state as an existential danger, regardless of the actual policy intentions of the terrorists.

The goal of this research was to take stock of where we are in terms of terrorism's development and where we might go from here. We are currently living in the fourth stage of terrorism, which follows three previous phases over the past 120–130 years. One of the most well-known terrorist organisations, Al Qaeda, has changed and adapted so much in recent years that it has outlasted every military effort to eradicate it. Plus, it has managed to spread its influence to the Muslim communities that already exist in European countries. For very some time, Al Qaeda has not existed as a terrorist organisation, but rather as a religious organisation that speaks for a certain community. If it were a conventional terrorist organisation, its destruction could be reasonably predicted within a few years. There are already second-, third-, and even fourth-generation Al Qaeda members, and the group seems to be following a reasonably consistent strategy and clearly outlining its aims. In spite of military suppression, it continues to enjoy widespread support, as evidenced by the success of insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan. Since this terrorist group is immune to the usual factors that lead to their death, and has expanded its influence, reach, and resources to an unprecedented level, the current scenario is quite concerning, to say the least. Nonetheless, despite everything, it is not unreasonable to wish for a spark of light amidst all this gloom.

·       Protection of Human Rights while countering terrorism:-

It's important to remember that state-level counterterrorism efforts can have just as much of an effect on human rights and social order as terrorism itself. It is the responsibility of states to implement effective anti terrorism measures since terrorism threatens a variety of basic liberties. Human rights protection and promotion are mutually supportive of efforts to combat terrorism.

The United Nations Security Council has moved swiftly to strengthen the legal framework for international cooperation and common approaches to the threat of terrorism in areas such as preventing the financing, lowering the risk that terrorists might acquire weapons of mass destruction, and improving cross-border information sharing, as well as establishing a monitoring body (The Counter Terrorism Committee) to supervise the implementation of these measures.

Human rights and its protection can be a key obstacle when it comes to confronting and overcoming the growing threat of terrorism posed by non-state actors around the world. We all know that terrorist acts hurt society, but sometimes the measures taken to stop them might have unintended negative consequences itself. Every government has a responsibility under international law to combat terrorism and safeguard its citizens' fundamental freedoms.

Following the UNGA's (United Nations General Assembly) ratification of the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, the international community has begun implementing measures to defend human rights in the battle against terrorism. They have promised to comply with their broad commitments under international law in any counterterrorism efforts. Human rights abuses created outside of a country's boundaries are rarely criticised or observed by the international community, even when internal critics may accuse other states of doing little to stop the crimes. The time has arrived for states to take responsibility for their citizens. The United Nations Security Council has on multiple occasions condemned states for aiding and abetting terrorists and that strong measures be taken against those responsible for human rights abuses in such countries. However, depending on the specifics of the situation, states can restrict the exercise of some human rights (such as the right to freedom of association and assembly, the right to freedom of movement, etc.) for a limited amount of time. Nonetheless, every state must follow certain guidelines when exercising this power.

·       Prescription by law:-

According to this concept, while limiting the exercise and enjoyment of human rights by the regional or domestic human rights instruments, the parameters of such limitations should be made clear, so that every individual can have recourse to an appropriate legal remedy and that the people are able to regulate their conduct accordingly. In accordance with this principle, the right to due process of law is regarded as one of the most important right of the people.

It is further important to note that, the permissible and legitimate restrictions and limitations on the enjoyment of fundamental human rights will vary according to the need of the time. Usually the main grounds for imposition of such limitations and restrictions are- national security, public safety, public order, health and human rights and freedoms of other people living in the society.

The principles of “necessity” and “proportionality” are of fundamental nature with respect to the limitations on human rights. These principles are dependent upon the pressing nature of “need”. The human rights available with the people are to be limited only in the case of necessity or in other words, the limitations on the human rights are to be proportional to necessity. In order to understand this concept and how the aforementioned principles are applied in the real scenario, we take an example of “Freedom to express”. [4]Freedom to express is a recognized human right and that it is required to be utilized by the people in a good sense, but if such right is being used by the people for the purpose of incitement and promotion of terrorism, then the exercise of such right can be restricted by the authorities which too shall be done in accordance with law and to achieve a legitimate purpose.

“Derogation” of human rights is a big question that revolves around in the minds of many. By Derogation, we mean- “the rights which can be annulled or cancelled”. No doubt that certain treaties governed by the international law provide for the derogation of human rights, but it must be remembered that such derogation is subject to restrictions and limitations. In emergency situations or in emergency like situations, such derogation is made permissible under the international law. This principle has been laid down in “Article 4 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights”. Under Article 4(2) of ICCPR, certain human rights have been brought under the umbrella of non-derogable human rights, which means that even in emergency or in emergency like situations, such human rights cannot be derogated by the authorities. Among such rights are- the right to life; freedom from torture or inhuman behavior or degrading treatment; prohibition against slavery and servitude; freedom from being imprisoned for failure to fulfill a contract; freedom from retrospective penalties; right to be recognized as a person before law and freedom of thought, conscience and religion.

It is alleged that derogation of human rights is a rational response and the states can use it while facing serious threats. Moreover even the power of a state to derogate certain human rights within the ambit of Article 4 of ICCPR is not unlimited, but there is a permissible extent for such exercise of derogation. Therefore, it is to state that the activity of derogating the human rights should be temporary in nature and that the main aim of the state should be restore a situation of normalcy as soon as possible.

·       Specific Human Rights Challenges in context of terrorism;

Human rights violations are commonly associated with terrorist groups and their operations, yet it has been discovered that states are also complicit in these abuses. Right to Life is a basic human right that, if violated, would prevent the enjoyment of all other human rights. States are obligated to adopt counterterrorism measures under the terms of those policies, but the targeted execution of suspected terrorists as an alternative to arrest and prosecution has done more harm than good to society as a whole. States frequently resort to carpet bombing and targeted bombing in their efforts to combat terrorism, despite the fact that both strategies have a negative impact on human rights and ultimately fail to achieve their stated goals.

Article 1 of the International Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment specifically names torture as a violation of human rights. Further, the prohibition of torture and other cruel and inhuman treatment and the norm to grant punishment is one of the most significant norm of the International Law, and is a rule of jus cogens, therefore is a binding norm under the International Law. To be clear, no state has the right to arbitrarily detain, arrest, or transfer someone suspected of terrorism without following the established standards of international law.

But unfortunately, the states do not go with the set principles and that the states where any such terrorist activity takes place, either arrest, detain or transfer such offenders without complying with the due process of law. During this process, even the ones who have no direct role to play in any of the offensive acts or whose involvement in the alleged wrongful act is quite doubtful in itself, are unnecessarily being targeted, as a result of which such people are being forced to seek asylum.

Liberty and security of individuals needs to be taken care of. Some states have come up with new provisions to effectively counter terrorism, but these provisions or the steps taken to counter terrorism might be against the basic norms recognized worldwide. These provisions consist of- provisions regarding bail, remand and arrest of the suspects. Many a times the states to compress the liberty and security of a person tries to keep a person in constant detention, which allows the authorities to carry out compulsory questioning in order to gather some sort of information from the suspects.

Concluding this stance, it is to be stated that, many challenges come across in the path to safeguard the basic human rights of the individuals, no matter who such person is. Irrespective of the fact that such person is a terrorist, engaged in carrying out various terrorist activities, no state has the authority to snatch away such person’s individual rights, except according to the due process of law.

·       State Violations:-

Under this concept of “State Violations”, we are going to comparatively analyze “State Terrorism” with “Combating Terrorism”.

It is a well-known fact that, “human rights violations are committed by the states in various situations, for instance- during the search operations, during encounters which are sometimes fake and at other times sometimes genuine”, therefore, these at many occasions result in human rights violations. For example, if we consider the manner in which the search operations are being carried out or the manner in which encounters take place, no one can actually make out as to which encounter made by the authorities was genuine or which amongst those was fake. As far as the search operations are concerned, the authorities, in general, carry out these operations so ruthlessly, that it violates the basic human rights of the people, including, the right and freedom to move, right to life etc. This can also be referred to as “State Terrorism” which is in a total contrast with what the state claims to do as its function that is, countering terrorist activities. It is to state here that, when the state itself is spreading “State Terrorism”, then it is quite difficult to accept that it will engage in such activities which would counter/combat terrorism.The issues of 9-11 attacks and the development of counter terrorism efforts, had a long standing effect on human rights and terrorist activities.

·       Conclusion

Concluding this article, it is to be stated herein that, some difference between the terrorist activities and the counter terrorist activities should be maintained. It should not be the case that efforts made to prevent the commission of wrongful act becomes equally wrongful as that the act itself. The authorities should keep in mind that the basic human rights of the citizens are not violated irrespective of the fact that terrorists fall under the term “people”. The rights cannot be taken away except with the authority of law.

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM OF USA, NORTH KOREA AND SAUDI ARABIA

LABOUR LAWS AND FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS: “Two aspects of one coin”

Human Rights Violations in India, Brazil, and Mexico: A comparative study and their enforceability