Torture: myths and facts

Myths about torture

Universally deplored, torture was once a practice that provoked unwavering condemnation. States that used torture to repress their citizens were reviled and called to account by the international community. Yet in recent years some have sought to justify the use of torture as a means to the end of keeping the public safe from harm. Much of the debate has been prompted by the global threat of terrorism, which is undoubtedly a serious and pressing issue. By pitching national security against the use of torture some governments and leading thinkers have sought to dress up torture as 'interrogation' or to legitimize its use.

The current misleading and inaccurate information surrounding the issue of torture has given rise to a new mythology. Here we seek to dispel some of those myths and describe the reality of torture that we see through the experience of our clients from countries around the world.

Myths:

 

MYTH: Torture works

FACT: It has been accepted since the time of Plato that torture is categorically ineffective in extracting information.

In the experience of thousands of survivors seen by the MF, most people subjected to extreme levels of psychological and physical pain and suffering will say anything and even sign false confessions to make the torture stop. Any information which may be extracted under torture is therefore unreliable. This scenario was actively played out in the case of the 'Tipton three', who while held in Guantánamo Bay confessed to meeting Osama bin Laden, despite being in the UK at the relevant time. They were ultimately released without charge.

Information extracted under torture is also inadmissible in a court of law. Under Article 15 of the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, "any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made".

MYTH: Torture is a means to an end

FACT: The 'ticking time bomb' argument is that if by torturing a person a catastrophe could be avoided, then torturing that person would be an acceptable means of saving the lives of thousands of others. The human rights of one person are pitched against the safety of thousands in an emotionally persuasive argument that has garnered much support in the wake of 9/11 and the climate of fear of war and terrorism.

However, the scenario is a hypothetical extreme with no basis in reality. It also presupposes that torture would be limited to one particular incident and that in fact, the information sought to be gained would actually be proffered under torture. Yet as history shows, to permit any abhorrent practice once is to set a dangerous precedent. Most recently, this was seen when the "enhanced interrogation techniques" used in Abu Ghraib were replicated in Guantánamo.

Torture not only degrades the victim, it degrades the torturer and the society that permits it. When governments condone torture they risk losing their legitimacy.

Back to top

MYTH: Only criminals and terrorists are tortured

FACT: In 2007, the MF received requests for help from some 2,000 people who had fled 95 countries across the world.

The vast majority of MF clients report having been targeted due to their race, ethnic origin, gender, religious, cultural or political beliefs. Political activists and journalists are often targeted by the authorities for vocalising their opposition to government policies. Many others find themselves falsely implicated in terrorist incidents with which they had no involvement. Many people are targeted for torture during conflicts, where torture is used to instil a climate of fear and to force people to flee.

The husbands, wives and children of people targeted by state agents are frequently targeted simply by association in an effort to get to someone else. This has been particularly true for women fleeing torture in Sri Lanka. Significant numbers of the wives of men who were either members or suspected members of the Liberation Tamil Tigers of Tamil Elam (LTTE) reported to the MF how they were detained and tortured.

MYTH: Rape is not torture

FACT: Rape is classified as an act of torture within international human rights, humanitarian and criminal law, and is also recognised as a war crime or act of genocide.

The inclusion of rape in international legal standards acknowledges the severity of the act of rape as a method of torture, and recognises the need for greater protection for victims, particularly at times when they are most susceptible to infringement.

Read the MF's report, 'Rape as a method of torture'.

Back to top

MYTH: Only women are victims of rape

FACT: Although women and girls are the predominant victims of rape, men and boys are also subjected to sexual abuse and rape. However, due to overwhelming feelings of shame, humiliation and cultural taboos, male rape often remains undisclosed.

For female victims, gang rape is a common experience reported. Many of the male clients seen by the MF describe being raped individually, by other men, while alone. In such cases, the torture has usually taken place when one man is in control of another, commonly in detention. Survivors have also reported being raped at home, or being abducted and raped in an isolated place.

MYTH: The effects of torture are only temporary

FACT: Torture often has lifelong physical and psychological consequences. Surviving torture is only the beginning of a long journey towards rehabilitation.
Torture can result in lasting physical injury, including permanent disability and scarring - inescapable reminders of the suffering endured by victims, which can exacerbate suffering and prolong the rehabilitation and treatment process.

Some survivors of sexual torture contract sexually transmitted diseases including HIV-AIDS, and some women become pregnant from rape, causing further trauma and life-changing consequences.

Many survivors seen by the MF receive care and treatment for post traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, flashbacks, nightmares and insomnia. Depression, exacerbated by overwhelming senses of humiliation and shame, triggers suicidal tendencies in some survivors.

Having fled for survival, clients can feel extreme guilt for leaving family, friends and other victims behind. Other survivors find it difficult to form and maintain relationships, have physical contact and to trust other people.

Back to top

MYTH: Torture only has lasting effects for the victim

FACT: The torturer's goal is to repress and dehumanise the victim. While the act of torture is directed at an individual, the effects are widespread, resonating with those who are witnesses, others who may hear the torture taking place and the families and communities of torture survivors. Torture has a metastasising effect on the lives of any of those who it touches - including the perpetrators.

The effects of torture can last a lifetime. In addition to post traumatic stress disorder, depression, anxiety, flashbacks, nightmares and insomnia, torture survivors can end up avoiding interacting with other people and distancing themselves from the outside world.

Children of torture survivors may be forced to interpret the stories of their parents to the authorities, causing them to digest and repeat information which can have a traumatising effect. The family context of a torture survivor is profoundly changed, presenting often overwhelming challenges to those who have a family member who has survived torture.

More broadly, the consequences for societies where torture is condoned are severe. Where torture is tolerated as a seemingly useful and acceptable technique to keep communities safe or to repress others sets a dangerous precedent that human rights are an expendable commodity.

MYTH: Detainees on hunger strike are force fed for their own benefit

FACT: In 2006, four United Nations' special rapporteurs, reporting to the UN Commission of Human Rights, declared force-feeding amounted to torture under Article 1 of the UN Convention against Torture. 

In its 1975 Declaration of Tokyo, the World Medical Assembly prohibited force-feeding advising "where a prisoner refuses nourishment and is considered by the physician as capable of forming an unimpaired and rational judgment concerning the consequences of such a voluntary refusal of nourishment, he or she shall not be fed artificially".

The WMA's subsequent 1991 Declaration of Malta reinforces that "forced feeding contrary to an informed and voluntary refusal is unjustifiable" and recognises hunger strike as a "form of protest by people who lack other ways of making their demands known".

Force-feeding involves forcibly restraining a person in order to insert a tube through the mouth or nose down to the stomach, causing extreme pain and often bleeding and vomiting.

In 2007, the MF joined calls for the American Medical Association to launch disciplinary hearings against any of its members that were found to be involved in the force-feeding of detainees held in Guantánamo.

MYTH: Torture survivors are not detained in the UK

FACT: The UK Government's Operation Enforcement Manual states that torture survivors should not be detained unless there are exceptional circumstances, and even then, detention should be an absolute last resort.

While data on the number of torture survivors who are detained is not readily available, in 2007 more than 150 asylum seekers were released from detention after being assessed by the MF following claims of torture in their country of origin. According to a report in March 2008 by the Immigration Asylum Commission (IAC), and as exemplified by cases referred to the MF, many torture survivors continue to be detained.

Being detained is not conducive to effective therapeutic work or rehabilitation. According to Dr Christina Pourgourides, a former MF psychiatrist, who investigated the effect of detention on mental health, "for torture survivors the experience of detention may provoke feelings of fear and powerlessness and restimulate their distress".

Back to top

MYTH: 'Dawn raids' do not happen

FACT: 'Dawn raids' - the forcible removal of refused asylum seeking families in the early hours of the morning without prior notification - is a method currently employed by the UK Border Agency and administered by its officials.

Families are either taken directly to the airport where they will be removed to their home country or to an Immigration Removal Centre where they await removal.

MF clients have reported being subjected to dawn raids. The MF has called for an immediate moratorium on dawn raids, which have been known to involve the handcuffing of children.

MYTH: 'Waterboarding' is a legal method of interrogation

FACT: Waterboarding is a terrifying and dangerous torture method that makes victims feels as though they are drowning. Held down with a cloth stuffed into their mouth, victims are forced to ingest water hosed or poured liberally over their nose and mouth. Victim's take water into their lungs and suffer deprivation of oxygen to the brain and can very easily drown during this torture.

In February 2008 the US administration admitted to waterboarding three Guantánamo Bay detainees in 2003 and has justified this decision by maintaining that US Presidential orders to employ the practice take precedence over international human rights and humanitarian law.

This justification neither validates waterboarding as an acceptable interrogation method nor gives any legal basis for its use.

Back to top

MYTH: Agents of the UK do not engage in torture

The murder of Baha Mousa and torture of nine others

FACT: In March 2008, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) admitted breaching the European Convention on Human Rights in relation to the death of an Iraqi civilian and the torture of nine others in September 2003.

In July 2008, the MoD paid the families almost £3 million in compensation for the murder of Baha Mousa and the torture and abuse of nine others.

The family of Iraqi receptionist Mr Mousa brought the action against the MoD following his death and a coroner's report which identified 93 separate injuries to his body.

Over three years and at a cost of £20 million, the MoD argued that troops on overseas operations were not covered by European human rights law - an argument ultimately dismissed by the UK House of Lords.

A court martial hearing found that troops had ignored the 1972 ruling by the UK government which banned the use of hooding, stress positions and deprivation of food, noise and sleep. One soldier pleaded guilty to inhumane treatment and six others, including the commanding officer, were acquitted of negligence and abuse. No one was convicted of killing Mr. Mousa.

In May 2008 the MoD agreed to an independent public inquiry into the deaths, to investigate whether there is a systemic failure within the army and its training systems.

Alleged outsourcing of torture by UK to Pakistan

In July 2008, MPs called for an investigation into allegations that Britain had "outsourced" torture of its citizens to Pakistani authorities. Three British men allege they were arrested and tortured in Pakistan over lengths varying from 16 days to five months before eventually being released without charge.

MPs called for the Intelligence and Security Committee, which oversees MI5 and MI6, to investigate the allegations.  

MYTH: Evidence obtained under torture can be used in a court of law

FACT: The MF played a pivotal role in successfully advocating for evidence obtained under torture to be deemed inadmissible in British judicial proceedings, deemed illegal in December 2005.

A unanimous ruling by the House of Lords in 2005 overturned an earlier judgement by the Court of Appeal and the Special Immigration Appeals Commission which ruled that the state had no obligation to investigate how evidence is produced. The Lords rejected those judgments saying that if a court thinks "on a balance of probabilities" that evidence before is has been obtained through torture, it must rule it out.

Under Article 15 of the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, "any statement which is established to have been made as a result of torture shall not be invoked as evidence in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture as evidence that the statement was made".

The use of evidence obtained under torture is also in breach of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees a person a fair trial.

Back to top

MYTH: The UK has had no involvement in extraordinary rendition

FACT: In February 2008 the UK government admitted that it had received confirmation from Washington that US aircraft had landed at Diego Garcia, the British Indian Ocean Territory where the US has a large military base. Destined for Guantánamo Bay and Morocco, both aircraft carried a sole detainee and landed at Diego Garcia in 2002.

Further information about rendition flights landing in Diego Garcia