The first workshop on the UN Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment was held in Bangalore, India, last February. Participants included lawyers, journalists, human right activists and religious workers from India, Nepal, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. The proceedings of this workshop together with the participants’ statement are now in print and the recommendations made at that previous workshop will again be taken up for discussion in a bid to devise practical ways to oppose torture and other inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment.
During the last two decades there has been much interest in the issue of torture and inhuman and degrading punishment, due mostly to the efforts of committed human rights activists and the United Nations. Many countries have adopted the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment. In some countries the courts have also taken cognizance of the new law and have at times tried to impose the provisions of the new convention when actual cases were heard.
However by and large throughout all sectors of administration of justice there seems to be a rather a tolerant attitude towards torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment meted out by the law-enforcing authorities on citizens, particularly the poor. A tacit acceptance of torture as a part of criminal investigations remains prominent; this not withstanding that many countries are signatories to the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Some countries have even promulgated their own laws in keeping with this Convention, however these legal provisions remain merely on paper; in actual practice completely different situations exist. The attention of the human rights community in each country, each region and worldwide must be specifically directed towards this issue.
The types of torture prevalent in several countries are extremely gruesome and inhuman: the use of electrical gadgets and special devices; brutal forms of assault and special forms of torture of women are among the worst instances frequently reported to courts in these countries. Still, despite various declarations the attitudes adopted by the judiciary and human rights commissions do not show great resolve to bring such practices to an end.
Why is there such reluctance on the part of churches and religious bodies to address this issue? Is it that the efforts of the UN, various governments and the courts have gone unnoticed by community leaders? Or is it that community leaders do not think these legal provisions are made with a serious intent and therefore they do not believe that these provisions will be enforced? Is it rather that community leaders think that the provisions against torture, inhuman and degrading punishment cannot be enforced? Are there deeper social and psychological problems associated with torture? Is torture, inhuman and degrading punishment so traumatic an issue that religious groups are reluctant to broach it? If so, then what are the reasons?
Particularly in Asian countries, “ethics” are understood to be those rules taught by the authorities to discipline the people. Sometimes, references are made to Asian traditions where the kings too had their duties and were expected to rule righteously, but the contemporary problem remains that for millennia there has generally not been any practice of making the king or ruling elite subject to rules. Torture and inhuman and degrading punishment have therefore been actions by the elite on the ordinary people. Acts of violence by ordinary people against each other come to be considered crimes; acts of violence by the authorities, as the legitimate exercise of their authority.
This mental association of the exercise of authority with the use of torture and inhuman and degrading punishment may be a primary cause of the serious mental block in adopting the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. At this workshop we aim to closely examine why community groups, journalists, lawyers and the leaders from four religious groups – Buddhist, Muslim, Hindu and Christian – are reluctant to take an active part in promoting the ideas of this Convention. Individual participants at the seminar may examine their own attitudes towards this practice.
Do torture and inhuman and degrading punishment create indignation in you? Frank examination by individual participants on how a deep, innate respect for life and persons may be reconciled with tacit or explicit approval of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment – or how one’s ethical standards may accommodate torture or degrading treatment – could serve as a useful beginning for the workshop. Similarly, questions can be raised regarding each other’s willingness or unwillingness to confront this malicious practice or even the efforts of a large segment of the society to deny its magnitude. If torture does create indignation, then the seminar may examine how that attitude grew. Was it due to the witnessing of such acts and the realisation of their utter brutality and un-justifiability? Is it possible to examine why no such outrage may be felt in certain circumstances?
THE OBJECTIVE
To invite human rights activists, journalists, members of religious groups and lawyers to reflect together and devise ways and means to address the major issue of the breakdown of law and order reflected in the widespread use of torture and all forms of inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment.
PROGRAMME FOR THE SEMINAR
Major items:
1) Study of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment;
2) Study of country situations and cases; and,
3) Examination of ways to popularize the conclusions of the seminar, e.g.: through further seminars, discussions, pastoral letters, country meetings, posters, publications etc.
PREPARATION
1) Read the Convention and other related material;
2) Form an eGroup and initiate preliminary discussion and reflection; and,
3) Come with experiences for reflection.
