You are on page 1of 2

You can fight terrorism without infringing

upon human rights


There has been a general belief that while using counter terrorism, the violation of human rights is implied.
But in modern world where there are many organizations on human rights that advocate that human rights are
for all, including terrorists; the emphasis on fighting terrorism without infringing upon human rights is coming
into picture and is on discussion.

Origin of the claim


The origin of this claim has came from big organisations like UN and EU itself.
I would like to quote Council of Europe's Secretary General Walter Schwimmer from September 2002. He said "It is precisely in situations of crisis, such as those brought about by terrorism, that respect for human rights is
even more important, and that even greater vigilance is called for. At the same time, as I have continually
stressed since the attacks, the need to respect human rights is in no circumstances an obstacle to the efficient
fight against terrorism. It is perfectly possible to reconcile the requirements of defending society and the
preservation of fundamental rights and freedoms" [1].
United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan said - compromising human rights facilitates achievement
of the terrorists objective - by ceding to [them] the moral high ground, and provoking tension, hatred and
mistrust of government among precisely those parts of the population where he is most likely to find recruits.
Upholding human rights is not merely compatible with successful counter-terrorism strategy. It is an essential
element [2].

Importance of testing this assumption


The assumption needs to be tested for following reasons
1.Serious legal and ethical aspects are related to it.
2.If the assumption is true then counter terrorism strategies would need to be redefined in accordance
with it.
3.International efforts that are being taken to make counter terrorism more concerned of human rights
will need to be strengthened if the assumption is true.

Academic views for and against this assumption


In the paper on Should National Security Trump Human Rights in the Fight Against Terrorism? , Robert P.
Barnidge, Jr. concludes after analyzing the cases of many terrorists and the legal procedures laid out that there
should be a balance between counter terrorism activities and 'human rights'. Also he says that fighting
terrorism without infringing the rights of a terrorist is not completely possible but to a large extent possible
[3].
The Council of Europes Guidelines on human rights and the fight against terrorism states- Within the context
of the fight against terrorism, the collection and the processing of personal data by any competent authority in
the field of State security may interfere with the respect for private life only if such collection and processing,
in particular:

1.Are governed by appropriate provisions of domestic law;


2.Are proportionate to the aim for which the collection and the processing were foreseen;
3.May be subject to supervision by an external independent authority. [4]
In a sum it says that there can be human rights violations in small ways but still the truimph of human rights
can be saved. In the Human rights fact sheet 32 of it has been quoted A human rights analysis of the impact of
these counter-terrorism measures merits particular consideration in the light of the serious consequences they
may have for the individual, as well as for his or her family and community.[5]
Whereas the argument given by Ted Lapkin in [6] says that ... despite their inherent limitations ... ability of
Western democracies to fight terrorismlies in their ability to establish a clear differentiation between licit
and illicit means of conducting armed conflict. To blur this distinction and to unnecessarily apply the Geneva
Conventions to illegal combatants would erode that distinction and constitute not only a legal mistake, but an
ethical one as well.

Conclusion
Taking in view the arguments and studies we have seen it seems imperative that a counter terrorist measure
needs to be so designed that it does not violate human rights. But also the other point which all of these point
is that in the present senario it is not there and almost impossible to be followed strictly.
UN Human rights Commission emphasizes on strict following of human rights but still gives some conditions in
which if imperative it can be violated; so does the Council of Europes Guidelines on human rights says.
Discussing on all these we can reach to the conclusion that the assumption You can fight terrorism without
infringing upon human rights is partly true.

Reference
[1] Guidelines on human rights and the fight against terrorism adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 11
July 2002 at the 804th meeting of the Ministers Deputies (ISBN 92-871-5021-4)
[2] Kofi Annan, United Nations Secretary General, Address to the closing plenary of the International Summit
on Democracy, Terrorism and Security, Madrid, Spain (10 March 2005). Press Release, UN Doc SG/SM/9757
[3] Should National Security Trump Human Rights in the Fight Against Terrorism? Robert P. Barnidge, Jr. Link
- http://ssrn.com/abstract=1156775
[4] 804th meeting 11 July 2002, Guidelines of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on human
rights and the fight against terrorism. Link - https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=991179
[5] Fact sheet 32, Human Rights Fact Sheet series, published by the Office of the United Nations High
Commissioner for Human Rights, United Nations Office at Geneva. (ISSN 1014-5567)
[6] Does Human Rights Law Apply to Terrorists? by Ted Lapkin, Middle East Quarterly,FALL 2004 VOLUME 11:
NUMBER 4 pp. 3-13. Link - http://www.meforum.org/651/does-human-rights-law-apply-to-terrorists

You might also like