The Ban on Torture Cannot Be Suspended
Published in Gazeta Wyborcza
(Poland) on 15 June 2011
by Agnieszka Bieńczyk-Missala (link to original)
(Poland) on 15 June 2011
by Agnieszka Bieńczyk-Missala (link to original)
Translated from
by Matthew Matyjek.
Edited by Jennifer Pietropaoli.
Six years after Human Rights Watch revealed the existence of secret CIA prisons in Poland and other European countries where torture most likely was being used, it is surprising how little is being spoken of the issue. The most surprising is the common language from the left and the right, both of whom want to sweep the matter under the rug.
There is no reason — neither national security nor bilateral U.S.-Polish relations — that could justify the establishment of a secret prison run by a foreign intelligence agency. Such a prison would be in direct violation of the Polish Constitution and of international agreements signed by Poland with the United Nations, the European Council and the European Union. If the decision was made to allow such a prison, it should be counted as one of the most shameful acts in our history. This fact would be made worse if Polish authorities were aware of the torture that took place.
Certain human rights and liberties can be suspended in times of war or under special circumstances. However, it was no mistake that with the ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 1966 or the European Convention on Human Rights in 1950, the signatories of these documents decided that there could be no suspension on the ban to torture. It is absolute.
Much has been written about the uselessness and ineffectiveness of torture in the time since Guantanamo Bay opened, especially after the revelations about Abu Ghraib. The level of acceptance of these practices was shocking. Up until the beginning of the War on Terror, no serious politician in the democratic world would even think of the possibility of using torture.
It should be worth noting that in 1776, Poland was among the first nations to ban torture. The ratification by Polish communist authorities of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 1976 was not due to any lofty ideals of human rights, but a desire to get Western credit. Prime Minister Tadeusz Mazowiecki’s decision to join the U.N. Convention Against Torture — ironically promoted by the U.S. and Amnesty International — and the European Convention on Human Rights, which gives any citizen the ability to sue the government in a court in Strasbourg, was seen as a move to associate Poland more with Western Europe — the same Europe that decided to build a more unified European continent where human rights and democracy are respected.
We now know that European nations have not consistently respected human rights. Even the most respected European nations have erred. How they handle these mistakes is the measuring stick by which one can evaluate their democratic standards. One has to be grateful for “enterprising” journalists and NGO's, who understand that citizens have a right to know when their government has violated human rights standards. By doing so, they make democracy stronger.
There is no reason — neither national security nor bilateral U.S.-Polish relations — that could justify the establishment of a secret prison run by a foreign intelligence agency. Such a prison would be in direct violation of the Polish Constitution and of international agreements signed by Poland with the United Nations, the European Council and the European Union. If the decision was made to allow such a prison, it should be counted as one of the most shameful acts in our history. This fact would be made worse if Polish authorities were aware of the torture that took place.
Certain human rights and liberties can be suspended in times of war or under special circumstances. However, it was no mistake that with the ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 1966 or the European Convention on Human Rights in 1950, the signatories of these documents decided that there could be no suspension on the ban to torture. It is absolute.
Much has been written about the uselessness and ineffectiveness of torture in the time since Guantanamo Bay opened, especially after the revelations about Abu Ghraib. The level of acceptance of these practices was shocking. Up until the beginning of the War on Terror, no serious politician in the democratic world would even think of the possibility of using torture.
It should be worth noting that in 1776, Poland was among the first nations to ban torture. The ratification by Polish communist authorities of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 1976 was not due to any lofty ideals of human rights, but a desire to get Western credit. Prime Minister Tadeusz Mazowiecki’s decision to join the U.N. Convention Against Torture — ironically promoted by the U.S. and Amnesty International — and the European Convention on Human Rights, which gives any citizen the ability to sue the government in a court in Strasbourg, was seen as a move to associate Poland more with Western Europe — the same Europe that decided to build a more unified European continent where human rights and democracy are respected.
We now know that European nations have not consistently respected human rights. Even the most respected European nations have erred. How they handle these mistakes is the measuring stick by which one can evaluate their democratic standards. One has to be grateful for “enterprising” journalists and NGO's, who understand that citizens have a right to know when their government has violated human rights standards. By doing so, they make democracy stronger.