Examine the validity of claims of human rights and national security dichotomy in the age of international terrorism

Table of contents

Abstract .2

Introduction .2

The study of international human rights and their changes over the years .3

The influence of terrorist acts on the international laws .5

The counter-terrorism methods and the human rights limitation .7

The main rules the countries should follow in fight against terrorism .9

The recommendations and solutions .11

Conclusion .13

Bibliography .14

Human rights violations in the fight against terrorism

Abstract

The given is designed in to consider the limitation of

basic international human rights that takes place in the fight against terrorism . Here we will explain the connection between the anti-terrorism measures and human rights violations and observe the necessary recommendations created for states in to prevent the violation of basic human rights in the fight against terrorism

Introduction

Many experts consider the terrorist attacks happened in the United States of America in 2001 to be the consequence of the lack of safety Different countries all over the world face this problem , so it became a primary concern . Almost every state reacted to the September 11th events by making urgent amendments to the laws in force and taking necessary measures to fight against global terrorism . However in some states the taken measures appeared to be contradictory to human rights notwithstanding that the primary task of the legislation is to protect them as much as it is possible . While solving the problem of the lack of safety , the government should not provide safety violating the human rights . It must guarantee the preservation of basic rights even in conditions when the people safety is of great importance

Human rights are usually considered to be a serious obstacle to efficient fight against terrorist acts not a precondition for real safety . Some experts are sure that the danger of "terrorism " can give good reason for restraining the basic human rights . The ban against torment , a basic human rights rule and a principle of standard international regulation that every country and every person must have can be violated in the fight against terrorism

The main idea of the given is that it is serious violation , not the preservation of basic international human rights that causes lack of safety . Amnesty International 's and other bodies ' investigation wants to offer new methods for the countries to guarantee that its view on terrorism not only recognizes but makes the necessity to defend human rights an integral part in the fight with terrorism

The study of international human rights and their changes over the years

The reconsideration of the main lawful patterns in the Western countries with a cynical observation of their fundamental policies was started by researchers many years ago . At the same time as the analysis was far-reaching , the critical lawful campaign became to some extent old-fashioned because its legitimate acumen was either took up by ordinary legal study or replaced by up-to-date areas of lawful investigation , involving feminist laws , postmodern study etc (Onuma 2000 ) Lately some of the academic successors of modern recovery of lawful realism investigated more carefully their hermeneutical method trying to enlarge their analysis to include the authority relations that are the part of the history and conversations about international human rights and of the main basics of international regulation

For instance Makau Mutua , stated that the human rights movement is marked by adamning metaphor and its grand narrative contains a subtext that depicts an epochal

contest pitting savages , on the one hand , against victims and saviors on the other (Mutua 2001 . Another expert , Catherine Powell , wrote that : nation-states which are geographically located in the West are culturally neutral ' and that Western states are therefore not susceptible to relativist behavior (Powell 1999

However , she states

Taken collectively , these assumptions construct Western states as good actors and non-Western states as bad actors vis-a-vis human rights compliance , even while this construction does not necessarily square with the reality on the ground . For decades , scholars have discredited the construction of non-Western countries as the culturally primitive other ' which allowed the West to define a contrasting identity as rational and civilized - a device used in the service of colonialism and imperialism . Today 's selective invocation of culture and relativism to describe human rights noncompliance by non-Western countries , while noncompliance by

Western countries is rationalized , recreates a West /Rest dichotomy that is preoccupied by an assumed default Western conception of human rights (Powell 1999

Looking for the right solution Anghie considered the problem in the same way as experts all over the world analyzed the law in terms of how the positive relations is set and controlled between independent countries On the contrary , Anghie is absolutely right saying that fights described in history were barely between independent partners because the non-

European state was typically considered to be just somewhat independent Therefore , Anghie states

What passes now as the defining dilemma of the discipline , the problem of among states , is a problem which , from the times of its origins , has been peculiar to the

specificities of European history . And , further , that the extension and universalization of this European experience , which is achieved by transmuting it into the major theoretical problem of the discipline , has the effect of suppressing and subordinating other histories of international law and the peoples to whom it has applied . Within the axiomatic framework which decrees that European states are sovereign while non-European states are not , there is only one means of relating the history of the non-European world : it is a history of the incorporation of the peoples of Africa , Asia , the

Americas , and the Pacific into an international law which is explicitly European , and yet , universal (Powell 1999

The influence of terrorist acts on the international laws

The events happened on September 11 , 2001 shocked the whole world so much because the United States always was a prosperous country and it was really the first time when it faced so serious problems . And it was the terrorism that was guilty of that . The state and all the citizens were humiliated

A comparable incident happened in India on December 13 , 2001 . This incident makes the government work in the direction of reorganization of counter-terror laws (Pham 2006

The global protection of mutual achievement connected with any improvement connected with the on the international law in made by the UN . The new circumstances appeared after the attack in the United States uncovered the powerlessness of the world legislation (Pham 2006

The administration got extensive accepted hold up in support of the presented regulation denominated as counter-terror regulation ' and a stimulus to take more steps with the consequence that in the common environment established by this assault in support of license to limit freedoms , the efforts to intimidate and repress the media , in India and in other countries there was not complaint . Even the chosen agents who hold up these counter-terrorism ' laws in the Parliament sometimes suffered from these laws however there was not much complaints about it (Pham 2006

At the same time as in the Unites States the counter-terrorism measures were the mostly undesirable for foreigners , primarily from Asia , in India they appeared to be on the contrary unpleasant for native citizens

Here we can 't but mention that at the same time as all counter-terrorism measures taken by Asian states show a terrible pressure on the these states economy , these measures cause an enormous extra foundation for the American ammunition industry . These conditions , consequently , is strongly supported by the United States . The ammunition industry prospers in the conditions of the war . Ammunition is created for demolition and is of great necessity during the war (Pham 2006

Nowadays in our monopolar world counter-terrorism measures , particularly taken by the United States is closely connected to globalization and the primary goal is the restoration of the US economy . Legal experts scientists , and the media must observe carefully the taken

measures in to understand how they influence the Human Rights . The creation of the environment of intolerance by making the people believe in one god or another and insisting that the people should be watchful against one group or another is an issue that needs serious evaluation It is necessary to understand that limitation of basic rights can 't be rapid and unexpected (Cooper 2003

The new laws accepted always limits some rights and this is natural Really , some limits are unavoidable since the society is not ideal and all the people are not self-sacrificing . The new viewpoint springs from self-interest of people . The real capitalism must have the legislation to defend the self-centered character of the human being

Consequently , it is obvious that the laws limitations and restrictions made in to fight against terrorism should be inoffensive for people , strongly determined and flexible . The governments must provide the strong protection and the limitations should be temporary (Cooper 2003

In the present situation it is also essential to consider if the legislation preserves the people 's interests . The demands of the developing states may not coincide with the demands of industrial states . These circumstances demand courageous and truthful headship . As we hope that the terrorism is passing phenomenon that we will manage to defeat , human rights limitations must be passing as well because the human rights are constant (Cooper 2003

The counter-terrorism methods and the human rights limitation

Worldwide human rights regulation distinguishes and offers methods of limitation or deferment of definite rights that may be needed and allowed in separate cases to defend human rights . The events of September 11th must not change the basic principles . Countries should know well of the tasks set by the human rights

There should not be any dichotomy between safety and human rights . The theoretical connection between terror campaign and human rights , that makes the regulation and reverence of human rights the top priority in the struggle with terrorism , was stressed repeatedly by different experts . For example , Mary Robinson in her testimony stated that "an effective international strategy to counter terrorism should use human rights as its unifying framework " Also she mentioned that "the promotion and protection of human rights should be at the centre of the strategy to counter terrorism . Just as Kofi Annan , the Secretary-General in his report reminded the Security Council that "to achieve effective dissuasion , it is essential to remember that the fight against terrorism is above all a fight to preserve fundamental rights and sustain the rule of law . By their very nature , terrorist acts are grave violations of human rights . Therefore , to pursue security at the expense of human rights is short-sighted , self-contradictory , and , in the long run self-defeating ( HYPERLINK "http /web .amnesty .org /mavp /av .nsf /pages /geneva http /web .amnesty .org /mavp /av .nsf /pages /geneva

Mary Robinson , UN High Commissioner for Human Rights , states

While we recognize that the threat of terrorism requires specific measures , we call on all Governments to refrain from any excessive steps which would violate fundamental freedoms and undermine legitimate dissent . In pursuing the objective of eradicating terrorism , it is essential that States strictly adhere to their international obligations to uphold human rights and fundamental freedoms (www .osce .org /news /show_news .php ?id 2183

In the Rights Democracy it is stated that looking for the objective method between counter-terrorism rules and the defence of basic rights it is essential to remember

the necessity to the make existing laws respecting basic human rights that means to protect people against torment and cruelty

the necessity to provide safety measures for inmates , such as the right to have lawyers , etc

the necessity to take care about such groups as women , children immigrants , social minorities

the necessity to guarantee the protection against mistreatments of authority and that the power of the country is not unhampered

the necessity to put up with worldwide human rights regulation , mainly not to violate the basic rights

the necessity to consider human rights and safety to be well-matched

Rights Democracy approved the law on "Protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism " passed by the United Nation General Assembly in 2002 . The given law stresses the significance of human rights and basic liberties deference in the struggle with terrorism . The decision emphasized the importance for all countries to make sure , that definite basic rights are studied carefully and that if countries have to partially refuse from their responsibility that will be made in compliance with of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights . Also , it is necessary for Human Rights Commissioner to check the defence of human rights in the fight against terrorism and to provide countries with necessary instructions (Posner 2001

The main rules the countries should follow in fight against terrorism

The important task of the human rights bodies is to evaluate if the steps taken by the countries to fight with terrorism are compatible with general human rights and main regulation principles . Also it is important for commission as for the main body to give the necessary advices to the authorities . It should guarantee no disagreement between safety and human rights . It is essential to make certain that all possible attempts are made to defend the people endangered by the changes that violate basic human rights in the fight against terrorism

Rights Democracy suggests that the legislation should control the steps taken by countries to fight with terrorism . It is necessary for the countries to

Remember that the steps in to stop terrorist acts , should be made in compliance with basic human rights and regulation principles

Define main rules concerning lawful fights for human rights and equality and the defence of human rights protectors

Recommend all the countries to make sure that in their fight against terrorism they defend the safety and the human rights of citizens , that non-violent principles are carefully considered , and that essential advices and remarks accepted by the human rights agreement controlling bodies are paid the necessary attention

Request the organization of a new apparatus to control and examine the influence on human rights of steps made by the countries to fight with terrorism

Request proper actions of the Commission on Human Rights to check the influence of anti-terrorism actions on human rights and give the necessary advises for their observance (Posner 2001

Today experts understand that there is a high danger of a split rising between safety and human rights . According to Irene Khan , in to prevent this it is necessary to settle the double responsibility of authorities to guarantee human rights protection and safety . She states 'The Commission must send a clear message that there is no contradiction between human rights and security ( HYPERLINK "http /web .amnesty .org /mavp /av .nsf /pages /geneva http /web .amnesty .org /mavp /av .nsf /pages /geneva ) She calls states to guarantee that any steps they make in their fight against terrorism are in conformity with basic human rights

Irene Khan agrees with Mary Robinson that it is essential to observe carefully the influence of anti-terrorism campaign on basic human rights

Ms Khan states that 'An accountable state , based on respect for human rights and the rule of law is the best way of countering 'terrorism ' and violence by armed groups , there is no dichotomy between human rights and security . Effective action against terrorism can be taken without violating human rights . Insecurity is created when their rights are violated -- whether by states or non-state actors ( HYPERLINK "http /web .amnesty .org /mavp /av .nsf /pages /geneva http /web .amnesty .org /mavp /av .nsf /pages /geneva

The recommendations and solutions

In the discussion concerning anti-terrorism and the preservation of human rights in the Western states , there is usually a difference between the necessities of autonomy and fairness , and safety . This difference is inappropriate : the defence of basic international rights is basic factor of real safety and this factor must have the top priority in the fight against terrorism

In to achieve this it is necessary

1 ) Make up the lack in the countries ' criminal regulation reply to terrorist acts , connected with the determining of the issues blowing up lawful confidence and the confidentiality connected with terrorist black books (Cooper 2003

2 ) Convince the countries of the fact that if the common confidence in the value of fairness damaged by countries ' mistreatment of human rights , it puts at risk efficient collaboration to oppose terrorism (Cooper 2003

3 ) Show how the countries can full the gap in human rights regulation in the fight against terrorism by creating its individual lawful structure to guarantee that explanation of terrorism are adequately understandable and accurate in to offer lawful confidence and pass up ill-treatment of blacklisting , and by setting obvious and lawfully necessary principles concerning how the countries must act in accordance with their global responsibility to defend human rights (Cooper 2003

Speaking about the protection of international human rights , if the states are to create a convincing atmosphere of autonomy , safety and fairness , it should not disregard its responsibility for the people who move abroad . Currently it gives the impression that at the same time as collaboration between safety services , law and court saw no limitations the defense of international human rights is not so free (Powell 1999

The public speaking of basic human rights is too simply vanished in the lawful and scientific cloud of the international law , supplementary and opposing authorities . Counter-terrorism procedures which influence the human rights of people and obviously the lawful antagonism and disputes in community are cloaked in the mist of unclear laws that does not provide any effectual therapy to the violation of their privileges and leaves the countries uncertain about the efficiency of new laws connected with fight against terrorism . The compound lawful configuration of the Western countries must not undermine the defence of human rights and the essential political and legal responsibility . Non- obligatory announcements concerning the necessity for a therapy are merely not satisfactory (Powell 1999

In the Western countries , the rule of common approval is in danger because of the absence of real shared confidence . It is not very easy to accept that in a Union of common principles , one country can refuse from Article 5 ECHR in 2001 because of the terrorist acts and another state allows the arrest of terrorist suspects , though the latter is harshly disapproved by human rights commissions (Powell 1999

The difference that is present in several countries between events connected with terrorist acts and usual unlawful actions strengthens the problem . Associations made from time to time in community discussion between "violence " and definite parts of community because of their traditions , ethnic group or belief can stimulate thoughts of separation in societies and a generate a feeling that our community is overwhelmed

We should not apply the idea of "terrorism " as general to give explanation for any type of suppressive movement or the repression of international human rights defence . It is not useful for the people 's safety , to get an unjust confidence in a terrorist acts examination , or to aggressively isolate certain groups of the society . It is also not adequate to collaborate indistinctly with countries that do not value the regulation of law , equality or the defence of basic rights (Powell 1999

A comprehensible suggestion of whether and how the countries ' strategy is moving in a wrong way is the effort to take away the violence from the range of the planned outline resolution on practical human rights It is exactly the tool that should guarantee satisfactory defence in unlawful events during the struggle with against terrorist acts . This violence usually negatively influences basic human rights . Therefore terrorist acts are the most complicated cases that must be solved only preserving the values of basic human rights (Powell 1999

Conclusion

To sum up , it is necessary to recognize that terrorism itself violates the human rights . It is also essential to admit that laws limit these rights , inevitably . However it is necessary to understand that the governments have to make some limitations of human rights . While the worldwide population tries to comprehend and express an understandable explanation of "terrorism , the terrorists try to reach their political goals by means of violence . Rights Democracy worries about suppressive approaches applied by some authorities . The practice testifies that periods of problems with safety are exactly the time where it is essential to struggle for the defence of human rights . The struggle against terrorism should not result in making steps that are mismatched with global human rights . The human rights prevention is one of the most efficient measures in fight against terrorism

Bibliography

Mutua , Makau The Politics of Human Rights : Beyond the Abolitionist Paradigm ' Michigan Journal of International Law 17 , no . 4 (Spring 1996 : 591-613

Powell , Catherine Locating Culture , Identity , and Human Rights Columbia Human Rights Law Review 30 , no . 2 (Spring : 1999 : 201-224

Onuma , Yasuaki When was the Law of International Society Born ? An Inquiry of the History of International Law from an Intercivilizational Perspective ' Journal of the History of International Law 2 , no . 1 2000 : 1-66

Pham , J . Peter Torture , Democracy , and the War on Terrorism ' The Long Term View 6 , no . 4 (Spring : 2006 : 6-17

Posner , Richard Frontiers of Legal Theory ' Cambridge , MA : Harvard University Press , 2001

Cooper , Robert The Breaking of Nations : and Chaos in the Twenty-first Century ' New York : Atlantic Monthly Press , 2003

Crawford , James The Criteria for Statehood in International Law ' In R .Y . Jennings and Ian , 1978

Brownlie , eds . The British Year Book of International Law . Oxford Clarendon Press . 1976-1977 , vol . 48

Jackson , Robert H . Quasi-States : Sovereignty , International Relations and the Third World ' Cambridge : Cambridge University Press , 1990

UN Commission on Human Rights : No dichotomy between human rights and security available at HYPERLINK "http /web .amnesty .org /mavp /av .nsf /pages /geneva http /web .amnesty .org /mavp /av .nsf /pages /geneva

Press release available at (www .osce .org /news /show_news .php ?id 2183

PAGE 1

PAGE 1

Human rights violation in the fight against terrorism ...