Military Interrogations and Human Rights: Essay Sample

Introduction

Son et al. (2008) define human rights as the freedom and rights inherent to every human being in the world from birth until death. The rights are based on shared values like respect, fairness, dignity, independence and equality, which are protected by the law. Human right involves freedom from torture and slavery, freedom of expression and opinion, the right to education and work amongst others without discrimination (Son et al.,. 2008).In military interrogations, human rights have adopted the use of military schools and universities which have been documented in at least thirty countries with insecurities or armed conflict to protect education from being attacked of which human right watch is a member. Schools and universities have been taken over entirely or partially into barracks and military base. They are also used as interrogation and detention facilities to store and hide weapons and ammunition and also for training fighters. This has been adopted in many countries amongst them being Afghanistan, Cameroon and Congo (Brigham, 1999).

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

All humans have a right against torture. Torture can be defined as the practice or action of inflicting server pain on someone as a punishment to force them to say or do something (Son et al., 2008). Torture is highly prohibited and requires parties to take effective measures to ensure it is prevented in any territory under their jurisdiction. This prohibition is not-derogable and absolute, not negotiable. This also involves the prohibition of parties from extraditing returning or befouling any person to a state where there are substantial reasons to believe they are in danger of being subjected to torture. According to the committee against torture, this danger must be assessed not just for the initial receiving state but also to states in which the person may be consecutively expelled, extradited or returned.

Humanitarian intervention is also an essential aspect of the rights governing military. This involves the use of force against a nation by another state or states with a common goal of ending or at least reducing suffering within the people of the first state. These sufferings in a country may be as a result of a humanitarian crisis, internal or external wars and times crimes including genocide. Humanitarian intervention is justified for massive human rights violation. This is a beneficial and effective body which has been used for many years to fight for human rights in different nations. The American psychological association also prohibits the following, which is termed as violation of human rights: Violence to life health, physical or mental well-being of an individual. Actives that violate this right range from murder, mutilation, corporal punishment and torture. Outrage upon personal dignity that is humiliating and harsh treatment is also prohibited. Such acts like taking hostages, collective punishments and threats to commit any of the preceding acts are highly punished (Pope 2015)The American psychological association also works to ensure the required parties prevent others acts of cruel inhuman or degrading treatments and are prohibited and highly punishable.

Son et al., (2008), reports that the American psychologist association, American Medical Psychologist Association and the Psychiatric held a meeting to explore the ethical aspect of psychologists and psychiatrist's involvement in military interrogation. According to the US military doctrine, interrogation is the systematic way of producing information to answer a precise group of requirement through the direct or indirect questioning of the custodian of the forces conduction questionnaires (Pope 2015). Of the three associations, the American psychologist association and American medical psychologist association are closely related in terms of what the association allows the member to do. They are also related to their conceptual approach to any member involvement in military interrogations. Their ethical practices include the following: Never facilitate, engage in or countenance torture and other inhuman, cruel or degrading treatment. This rule is directly derived from the mandate "do not harm" These behaviors are always antithetical to their professional entities. Both associations unequivocally repudiate any member who gets involved in such an activity.

Secondly, psychologists are not allowed to participate in interrogations that rely on coercion. Pope (2015), defines coercion as the practice or action of persuading someone to do something using threat or force. According to American Medical Psychologists, coercion entails causing harm through physical injury or mental suffering. Since such an act is not rising to the level of torture, would constitute harsh, inhuman, humiliating treatment. Moreover, both the American psychological association and medical association have an indirect rather than direct involvement in the military interrogations (Son et al.,.2008). In the direct involvement, the psychologist directly interrogates the custodian, unlike in the indirect where the interrogation process is not done directly by the psychologist and custodian with this method put in place no direct mix between care-givers, the psychologist and the custodian.

Thirdly, both the physicians and psychologists don't mix the role of consultant to interrogation and that of the health-care provider. This total distinction between consultant and healthcare provider is important in both the association positions. According to the American Psychologist Association, psychologists are banned from getting involved into such" multiple relationships" the member in the association specialize and deal with the duties only within their area of specialization (Son et al., 2008).

Son et al., (2008) however reports that the two associations differ in one respect; According to American psychologist association, psychologists have an exclusive training to fill the role of observing interrogation to protect against" behavioral drift" on the interrogators part. Behavioral drifts include deviation from ethically professionally acceptable behaviors and may, therefore, lead to techniques of interrogation coercion. These drifts may arise where there is insufficient ethical guidance or oversight hence stress situation (Son et al., 2008). As experts in human behaviors, psychologists are trained in the observation and intervention techniques to control and prevent behavioral drifts. American medical association, on the other side, argues that while allowing physicians to conduct interrogations, they may not monitor the interrogation to intervene (Pope 2015).

References

Brigham, J. C. (1999). What is forensic psychology, anyway? Law and Human Behavior, 23(3), 273-298 doi.org/10.1023/A:1022304414537

Pope, K. S. (2015). Are the American Psychological Association's detainee interrogation policies ethical and effective? Zeitschrift fur Psychologie. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000062

Son, B., Soldz, S., & Davis, M. (2008). The ethics of interrogation and the American Psychological Association: A critique of policy and process. Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine, 3(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/1747-5341-3-3