The Absolute Violation. Why Torture Must Be Prohibited

238 Pages·2008·1.14 MB·English

by  Richard S. Matthews

THE ABSOLUET VIOLATION
The Absolute Violation
Why Torture Must Be Prohibited
RICHARD MATH
© McGill-Queen’s University Press 2008
ISBN 978-0-7735-3422-3 (cloth)
ISBN 978-0-7735-3451-3 (paper) Legal deposit third quarter 2008
Bibliothèque nationale du Québec Printed in Canada on acid-free paper that is
100% ancient forest free (100% post-consumer recycled), processed chlorine
free.
This book has been published with the help of a grant from the Canadian
Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences, through the Aid to
Scholarly Publications Program, using funds provided by the Social Sciences
and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
McGill-Queen’s University Press acknowledges the support of the Canada
Council for the Arts for our publishing program. We also acknowledge the
financial support of the Government of Canada through the Book Publishing
Industry Development Program (BPIDP) for our publishing activities.
Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication
Matthews, Richard
The absolute violation: why torture must be prohibited / Richard Matthews.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-0-7735-3422-3 (bnd)
ISBN 978-0-7735-3451-3 (pbk) 1. Torture. 2. Torture – Moral and ethical
aspects. 3. Torture victims. I. Title.
HV8593.M355 2008 323.4'9 C2008-901695-5
Typeset in Sabon 10.5/13
by Infoscan Collette, Quebec City
In memory of my father
DR KEITH MATTHEWS
Contents
Acknowledgments
Introduction
1 Understanding Torture
2 What about the Ticking Bomb?
3 Why Utilitarians Must Oppose Torture
4 Torture, Tragic Choices, and Dirty Hands
5 On Neither Excusing nor Justifying Torture
Conclusion
References
Index
Acknowledgments
Having finished this book, I now understand why no author writes a book alone.
Without the friendship and the intellectual and moral support of a lot of friends
and family members, I could never have finished this book. To be honest, I doubt
that I would ever have had the courage to start. Some read drafts of chapters,
others contributed insights through conversations, and all simply believed in me
and the importance of the project.
Heidi Matthews (LLB, LLM cand.) is one of the brightest individuals I’ve had
the good fortune to befriend. She convinced me to start the project and
contributed much valuable critical commentary and moral support. Dr Sean
McGrath of Memorial University of Newfoundland read a draft of the
introduction and provided enthusiastic debate and encouragement throughout. Dr
John Scott taught me the first philosophy course I ever took. He convinced me
early of the necessity for politically engaged philosophy and continues to mentor
me now, having read drafts of the introduction and the fourth chapter. He has
never turned down a request for time or aid since I first sat in his class. In spite
of two very young children and a busy job, Jordan Furlong (LLB) managed to
find time to edit the chapter on law and torture. His expertise both as an editor
and in the field of law was a wonderful gift to me. Additionally, I was very angry
at the time, and he patiently convinced me to tone down some of the more
impassioned remarks. We have been friends for a very long time, and he
demonstrated friendship’s virtue once again.
My colleagues and friends at Mount Allison University, Dr Paul Bogaard and
Dr Roopen Majithia, both supported me through dialogue and provided me with
the opportunity and the peace to devote myself to the extensive research needed
to pursue this project. Their encouragement was crucial. As well, Mount Allison
University provided me with the office space and library facilities to carry out
my work.
I had the good fortune to test each of the central theses on a lecture tour of
Australia in February 2007. Dr Barbara Hocking and the Association for
Canadian Studies in Australia and New Zealand were kind enough to provide me
with a grant; the graduate students and faculty of the Queensland University of
Technology warmly hosted me. In particular I want to thank Ms Jenny Jones, Ms
Eleanor Milligan, Dr Peter Isaacs, Mr David Massey, and Dr Trevor Jordan. The
experience and criticisms strengthened the book considerably.
I would also like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their extensive and
constructive comments on the manuscript. It has been enriched considerably by
their expertise. Likewise, I wish to express my deep appreciation to Philip
Cercone, Robert Lewis, Ligy Allakattussery, Joanne Pisano, Joan McGilvray,
and the other staff at McGill-Queen’s University Press.
My family, Dr Kathleen Matthews, Dr Clare Matthews, Katy Matthews (LLB),
and Keith Matthews (MBA), enthusiastically backed me throughout a very long
and challenging period. I hope they understand how much their belief in me
continues to mean.
Three friends have offered me particularly important support. I’ve shared
many doubts and conversations on politics with Michael Jacobs, who
consistently offers great insight. And Sean Windsor and Raymond Hartery have
each contributed vitally as well, notably by helping me to appreciate the
institutional realities that govern military decision making.
Above all, my partner, Emma Woodley, has been essential. A book of this
nature is occasionally painful to research and write. As important as it is, a week
spent reading nothing but human rights reports and the consequent horror stories
does little for the spirit. At every key moment, she literally held me together and
gave me the strength to continue. Not only did she offer me love, strength, and
emotional support, but she also offered me the benefit of her considerable radical
feminist insights into gender issues and patriarchy by criticizing the crucial first
chapter of the book and suggesting important additional texts for inclusion, such
as one by Susan Brison. In addition, she is the best editor I’ve ever worked with
and has provided invaluable help proofreading the book. I am blessed by her.
To the extent that the book works, it is because of them. Any errors, of
course, are mine.
THE ABSOLUTE VIOLATION
Introduction
This is a question of serving the dignity of man [sic] by methods that remain
dignified in the midst of a history that is not.
Camus 1991, 76
Prior to 11 September 2001 those unfamiliar with human rights work would
probably have accepted the commonplace that torture had been eradicated from
the civilized world. It was reserved for violent Third World dictatorships and
communists, something that “they” do, not “we.” Anyone with a more nuanced
knowledge of recent history and politics will be aware that the reality is rather
uglier. Even so, there seems to be little awareness of the extent to which modern
torture techniques were in fact developed by the most powerful industrialized
states. There is also widespread ignorance of the extensive evidence
demonstrating the use of torture by the United Kingdom, the United States of
America, France, and other democracies since the end of the Second World War.
Alfred McCoy’s (2006b) fascinating history of the Central Intelligence
Agency (CIA) and torture explores in great detail the psychological research on
torture performed in Canada and the United States in the 1950s and 1960s. These
programs resulted in methods that were then field-tested and revised in Vietnam
and in numerous Cold War counter-insurgencies across the globe over the past
forty years. Darius Rejali (2007b, 8) traces the development of stealth tortures in
modern democracies from early in the twentieth century. Analyzing the
“unnerving affinity between democracy and stealth torture,” Rejali argues that
exploration of stealth tortures is a consequence of governmental desires to
escape public monitoring and accountability. The French developed their own
theory of counter-insurgency warfare, with torture as a centrepiece of the
program, in the Algerian War of the 1950s and then sent staff officers to
Argentina and the United States to further disseminate their knowledge (Robin
2006, 46–7). The United Kingdom maintained at least one torture facility during
the Second World War and immediately afterward, mainly, it seems, to gather
intelligence about the Soviet Union in the early days of the Cold War (Cobain
2005). It also took advantage of American and French experience in torturing
suspected Irish Republican Army (IRA) members in the early days of the
“troubles” in Northern Ireland.
But torture practices were typically concealed, denied, or masked by