Torture Justified
Torture Should Not Be Justified
The act of torture is a grave violation of human rights that infringes objectives of the United Nations Charter. Since 1984, 155 countries have ratified UN Convention against Torture (UNCAT). Between these 155 countries, 142 countries were researched by Amnesty International, a non-profit organization in the forefront of the campaign against torture and a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. In result, in 2014 among 142 countries, 79 of these are still torturing. (Dolmaci, 2014).
That is hard to say that since UNCAT, torture is not happening anymore. Human rights observers in the whole world still documenting state-sanctioned torture and have set up several clinics to treat its survivors. Even in the last five …show more content…
3). However, many survivors of torture report that the information they revealed was intentionally incomplete or mixed with false information (Harbury, 2005).
Second, the Convention also states in Article 2 (2) that: “No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture” (p. 1). So, it is clearly unjustifiable, but however, someone who did torture usually has been given doctrine so the person would not be concerned of humanity or furthermore about the impact of torture.
Impact of torture straightly divided into two categories, first is the impact in bigger scale, such as; damage the relationship between countries, and cause bad publication for the tormentor’s country which could influence exchange rates. The second is impact in person, which categorized in two section, physical wound and psychological damage.
Physical wound is defined as dissolution of the natural continuity of any of the issues of the living body which caused by physical violence (Rao, 2013). Several examples of physical wounds are burns, disability, fracture, and incised
The act of torture is a grave violation of human rights that infringes objectives of the United Nations Charter. Since 1984, 155 countries have ratified UN Convention against Torture (UNCAT). Between these 155 countries, 142 countries were researched by Amnesty International, a non-profit organization in the forefront of the campaign against torture and a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. In result, in 2014 among 142 countries, 79 of these are still torturing. (Dolmaci, 2014).
That is hard to say that since UNCAT, torture is not happening anymore. Human rights observers in the whole world still documenting state-sanctioned torture and have set up several clinics to treat its survivors. Even in the last five …show more content…
3). However, many survivors of torture report that the information they revealed was intentionally incomplete or mixed with false information (Harbury, 2005).
Second, the Convention also states in Article 2 (2) that: “No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture” (p. 1). So, it is clearly unjustifiable, but however, someone who did torture usually has been given doctrine so the person would not be concerned of humanity or furthermore about the impact of torture.
Impact of torture straightly divided into two categories, first is the impact in bigger scale, such as; damage the relationship between countries, and cause bad publication for the tormentor’s country which could influence exchange rates. The second is impact in person, which categorized in two section, physical wound and psychological damage.
Physical wound is defined as dissolution of the natural continuity of any of the issues of the living body which caused by physical violence (Rao, 2013). Several examples of physical wounds are burns, disability, fracture, and incised