1 / 16

Constitution, Society, and Leadership Week 9 Unit 2 Concepts of Justice: Terrorism and Torture

Constitution, Society, and Leadership Week 9 Unit 2 Concepts of Justice: Terrorism and Torture. Christopher Dreisbach, Ph.D. Johns Hopkins University. Terrorism and Torture- i Unit Overview- i. Is torture ever just? From a constitutional point of view?

wade-greene
Download Presentation

Constitution, Society, and Leadership Week 9 Unit 2 Concepts of Justice: Terrorism and Torture

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Constitution, Society, and LeadershipWeek 9 Unit 2 Concepts of Justice: Terrorism and Torture Christopher Dreisbach, Ph.D. Johns Hopkins University

  2. Terrorism and Torture-iUnit Overview-i • Is torture ever just? • From a constitutional point of view? • This appears to be a question about retributive justice • Although it does not concern punishment for a proven crime

  3. Terrorism and Torture-iiUnit Overview-ii • Each of 5 sections in this unit looks at one of five answers to the question whether it is ever just to torture someone • Matthew Noah Smith, The Moral Significance of Terrorism • John Yoo and Robert J, Delahunty, Application of Treaties and Laws to al Qaeda and Taliban Detainees • Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 2006 • Alan M. Dershowitz, Should the Ticking Time Bomb Terrorist Be Tortured? A Case Study in How democracy Should Make Tragic Choices • Jeremy Waldron, Torture and Positive Law: Jurisprudence for the White House

  4. Terrorism and Torture-iiiSmith -i • Point: terrorism is uniquely morally objectionable • Cf. war crimes, genocide, assassination, and serial killing • Because terrorism • Violates the rules of war • Threatens the value of trusting relations internationally and • “Quick cessation to war” • “Lasting and just peace” • “Just forms of international peace”

  5. Terrorism and Torture-ivSmith -ii • Rejects the claim that terrorism = “violence internationally targeted at civilians,” since • Civilians can be combatants and soldiers can be noncombatants • Need to distinguish terrorism from war crimes and genocide

  6. Terrorism and Torture-vSmith -iii • Terrorist acts = “spectacular and preformative acts of violence that transgress shared rules of war.”

  7. Terrorism and Torture-viSmith -iv • Extended Argument • Part 1 • War is a moral disaster • Since it leads to undeserved suffering and death • Anything that limits that disaster is morally good • Shared rules of war limit that disaster • By providing “a minimal but sufficient basis for a trusting relationship even between mortal enemies” • Therefore, shared rules of war are morally good

  8. Terrorism and Torture-viiSmith -v • Part 2 • Shared rules of war are morally good • Terrorism violates shared rules of war • Therefore, terrorism is morally bad

  9. Terrorism and Torture-viiiYoo and Delahunty • Point: International treaties governing war do not apply to al Qaeda or Taliban detainees • Specifically, RE: detention and trial procedures • Since • Neither organization is a legitimate state actor • And therefore cannot be party to such an agreement • International law “does not bind the President or restrict the actions of the United States military • Because it does not constitute federal law recognized under the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution

  10. Terrorism and Torture-ixHamdan v. Rumsfeld • Point: A military commission • Convened to try Salim Ahmed Hamdan • A Yemeni national held in custody at Guantanimo Bay • Cannot proceed because • Its structure violates • The UCMJ • Geneva Conventions • Hamadan’s alleged offense—conspiracy—is not a violation of the law of war

  11. Terrorism and Torture-xDershowitz-i • Point: “If it is necessary to torture in the ticking bomb case, then our governing laws must accommodate the practice” • “If we refuse to change our law to accommodate any particular action, then our government should not take that action” • A warrant requirement • Only non-lethal torture

  12. Terrorism and Torture-xiDershowitz-ii • Justification • A society has a right to protect itself against terrorism • Torture warrant requirement would make matters easier to control with “a formal, visible, accountable, and centralized system” • “Decrease the amount of physical violence” against the suspect

  13. Terrorism and Torture-xiiDershowitz-iii • Justification (ctd) • Suspect’s rights better protected • No torture without compelling evidence • Better records kept of the acts of torture

  14. Terrorism and Torture-xiiiWaldron-i • Point: Torture is wrong in itself, not just by statute • Malum in se v. malum prohibitum • Yoo is wrong to think torture’s moral value is a matter of statute—malum prohibitum • Dershowitz is wrong to trust human motives in his torture warrant scenario

  15. Terrorism and Torture-xivWaldron-ii • Note: U.S. ratified several international agreements against torture • And has its own laws against torture • Because it recognizes the inherent evil of torture • Not because it wanted to make torture wrong by positive law

  16. Week 9 Unit 2 Concepts of Justice: Terrorism and Torture Constitution, Society, and Leadership

More Related