Terrorism has been a hot topic in the news for over a decade. It has impact people on an international level with countries like France, England, and the United States experiencing attacks. Currently Isis, a terrorist organization, has generated chaos in the Middle East. Government have been destabilized and peace and security jeopardized. Atrocious acts of violence have occurred from child beheadings to rapes and torture. Terrorism threatens the social and economic development of any place it affects. Furthermore, terrorism directly affects human rights. People lose freedoms and face subjugation from regimes of terrorist organizations. All of which have negatively diminish ones enjoyment of life as well as their human rights. International, national, and regional political leaders make promises and claims that counterterrorism measures will not encroach on human rights. Former President George Bush for example, preached on preserving human rights amidst counter terrorism efforts. However, living up to these promises and claims proves an obstacle, if not impossible. This is because pre-emptive counter terrorist measures have not been enough to remove the threat of future terrorist efforts nor is enough to effectively deal with current terrorist efforts.

The politically delicate nature of counterterrorism problems has worsened the task of averting attacks. Any law concerning counterterrorism must also conform to the requirements of human rights law. Rights and freedoms that are controlled by counterterrorism measures must come with limitations. These laws should be relative and established due process. To sum up universal human rights laws, cross-examination activities, secret imprisonments, warrantless national surveillance, and the ill behavior towards prisoners for the pursuit of counter terrorism remain gray area subjects that need in the very least, more examination.

Eventually there comes an impasse. Intelligence collecting with the purpose to thwart or halt terrorist activities before human lives are lost will always be more important than facing extreme human rights violations consequences.

Introduction:

Terrorism is an international problem. Within the last ten years, terrorist organizations like Isis, have gained a foothold and have begun implementing their own agenda on people they have captured or control. Counter-terrorism are measures performed by the government that are meant to tackle the problems involved with terrorism before it affects the public. This is done through either political or militaristic means.

Former president George W. Bush enacted several policies to deal with terrorism. Some of the changes although helpful towards the cause, also violated several human rights laws. For example, Bush signed into passing interrogation methods such as forced nudity and waterboarding. Waterboarding has been seen in the news for years as a torturous form of interrogation. People water boarded experienced extreme stress from the constant feeling of drowning when they are water boarded.

In 2007, Bush also signed an executive order that allowed the CIA to continue implementing harsh tactics during interrogation and apprehension of suspects related to terrorism (Ahmed, 2015). This continually harsh use of force affects the way people suspected of terrorism were treated by the American government. The public accepted the changes because they sought to end terrorism within the United States however, when counter terrorist measures affect human rights laws, there is backlash. This can be seen with foreign relations with the United States.

Starting from 2002, the Bush Administration helped expand what is known as extraordinary rendition (Feinberg, 2015). This means CIA agents were given the greenlight to abduct and transport terrorism suspects to nations such as Afghanistan and Egypt for interrogation. Secret prisons or "black sites" were also operated during this time where terrorist suspects were continually tortured and even killed. Yes, terrorism is a very real problem; however, not everyone the American government apprehended was guilty of a crime. The level of abused endured by some suspects shows the need for counter terrorist measures to include preservation of human rights.

Of course, it is entirely rational to assume, that countries will pursue counter terrorist measures that will prevent democracies from being undermined by extremist and terrorists, especially in the form of avoiding young Muslims citizens of those Western democracies from joining and working for these terrorist organizations. However, there is also a need to preserve humane treatment of suspects in order to preserve order. This is because on an international level, counter terrorist measures that avoid implementing with it, human rights laws, often lead to uprising and resistance from populations affected by such measures.

A prime example of this is the war in Afghanistan and the previous war in Iraq. These were considered by many as counter terrorist efforts in order to control and neutralize terrorist threats on an international level....

However, it left a population with heavy loss, continual human rights violations, and an increase in terrorist activity. In fact, the leader of Isis, Ibrahim Awwad Ibrahim Ali Muhammad al-Badri al-Samarrai, is an Iraqi and perhaps endured some of the atrocities committed during the war.
When human rights violations occur, it changes people. Those that escape from it or are affected by it, they become ruthless, desperate and may join the very thing counter terrorist measures aim to neutralize, terrorist organizations. This is because they want to feel a sense of stability and control within their lives, and will do what it takes to achieve it. It is always important to consider what consequences certain actions may bring in the future.

The last political leader to come out of this war or terror that has led a series of negative counter terrorism measures is President Putin. One of its most notably negatively impacted regions is Chechnya and the heavily criminalized areas within it. People there have grown to despise Russia and terrorist activity has increased rather than decreased within that region. Putin did not solve terrorist problems, but instead, exacerbated them. Therefore, governments must seek to reimagine counterterrorism laws in order to support human rights.

Body:

Counter terrorism is a major concern ever since the September 11 attacks. The United Nations has sought to curb terrorist activities and reduce resurgence of terrorism worldwide. They have done so in order to unequivocally condemn terrorism and recognize the duty to protect those living under terrorist regime or terrorist activity. However, the United Nations has also placed priority in regards to safeguarding human rights within the context of counter-terrorism measures. At the heart of the United Nations Global Counter Terrorism Strategy is the active desire to preserve human rights.

Member states recognize that in order for counter-terrorism measures to be effective, they must also include protection of human rights (Goderis & Versteeg, 2012). This is because these specific goals did not conflict with the main goals of counter terrorism, but instead complemented them and reinforced mutual aims. As mentioned briefly in the introduction, counter terrorist efforts that involved human rights violations often led to an increase in terrorist activity, not a decrease. Perhaps governments should take a page from the United Nations in implementing counter terrorist measures that include compliance with human rights obligations.

Special actions have been taken by the United Nations in order to actualize their goal. A tangible endorsement by Member States of the necessity to make the preservation of human rights an essential part of the global battle against terrorism was proven by the formation in 2005 of support of the Special Rapporteur on the protection and promotion of human rights as well as essential freedoms while opposing terrorism. The Special Rapporteur, functioning under the new Human Rights Council, aims to recognize exchange and endorse best practices on dealings to counter terrorism that preserve and respect fundamental freedoms and human rights.

The Special Rapporteur also covers the topic of claims of human rights violations within the progression of countering terrorism. Mr. Ben Emerson, the current special rapporteur, conducts visits to designated individual nations. He has become involved in communication with more than forty countries concerning their practices and laws (Fenwick, 2015). He reports frequently both to the Human Rights Council as well as to the General Assembly, which include selected thematic issues plus his country visits.

In these purposes, the Council entreated the Special Rapporteur:

To make real recommendations on the advancement and defense of human rights and essential freedoms while opposing terrorism, together with, at the demand of States, for the delivery of advisory services or practical assistance on such problems;

To request, gather, accept and exchange communications and information from and with all pertinent sources, as well as Governments, the persons concerned and their relatives, governments and societies, including through republic visits, with the agreement of the State concerned, on supposed violations of human rights plus essential freedoms while countering terrorism;

To assimilate a gender standpoint throughout the work of his mandate;

To recognize, exchange and indorse best practices on actions to counter terrorism that venerate fundamental freedoms and human rights;

To work in close harmonization with other pertinent bodies and contrivances of the United Nations, and in specific with other distinct procedures of the Council, to reinforce the work for the protection and promotion of fundamental freedoms and human rights while avoiding pointless repetition of efforts;

To grow a consistent dialogue and deliberate possible areas of collaboration with Governments as well as all applicable actors, including applicable United Nations…