Human Rights Issues With Pre Emptive Counter Terrorist Measures

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 bodies, expert agencies and programs, with, inter alia and the Counter-Terrorism Committee of the Security Council. This includes its Executive Directorate and the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force, plus the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, and other non-governmental organizations, while respecting the range of his mandate and completely respecting the individual mandates with a view to avoiding repetition of effort; and To report recurrently to the Council as well as the General Assembly.

This form of supervision and communication between nations offers at least a path of discussion and possible recognition of the acts committed to combat terrorism. Action against severe counter terrorist measures cannot happen unless people do not become aware of key problems associated with such measures (Mythen, Walklate & Khan, 2012). People must understand what is happening in terms of human rights violations. The best way to do that is through sending someone who witnesses the impact or affect first hand. This provide concrete evidence of human rights violations and provides a forum to discuss it.

Nations have corruption within their governments. Even in first world countries like the United States and England. Therefore, it remains important to try to recognize what kind of ill behavior exists within these counter-terrorist programs to thwart any human rights violations. By the United Nations sending someone to acknowledge what happens within these countries, this is the first step towards the goal of preserving human rights. People becoming aware of human rights violations through articles, interviews, and reports will help feed the need to end human rights violations in counter terrorist measures.

Therefore, the first main point lie in creating awareness of human rights violations within as many countries affected by terrorism as possible. It can be from both the terrorist side and the counter terrorist side. All of which will shed light on the need to stop needless and senseless violence. Because at the heart of human rights lies stabilization and preservation of freedom and dignity.

The UN exists as the center for human rights in the world. They are the ones that try to keep the human rights issue open internationally and fight to have counter-terrorism measures include policies that integrate human rights law. The UN has mad further progress with their desire to promote human rights causes. One of which is the modification of CTC (Jenkins, 2015).

The CTC is made up of members of the Security Council. It is mandated to review actions taken by states to avert and to penalize acts of terrorism. The Security Council does not serve as a human rights group, but as a structure of the UN. The Security Council is required to behave compatibly with the UN Charter plus human rights standards. This includes ius cogens norms. There exists an underlying obligation to safeguard that all national counter-terrorism measures remain human rights compliant. However, there are uncertainties that this obligation is being met.

This is shown through the High Commissioner for Human Rights and his profound concern for the multiplication of practices, legislations, and policies gradually being adopted by numerous states in the name of the battle against terrorism, which harmfully affect the enjoyment of almost all human rights. As part of the CTC's struggles to guarantee, that nations take human rights seriously they created an Executive Directorate or CTED. That Directorate, which comprises of human rights experts and liaises directly with the High Commissioner for Human Rights, is a step forward in the right direction (Jensen, 2014).

One of the main requirements of the CTED is to ensure the CTC integrates human rights into its effort, as suitable, noting the significance of states guaranteeing that counter-terrorism measures remain consistent with their duties under international law, in specific human rights law, humanitarian law, and refugee law. Human rights as well as counter-terrorism at the UN

Have experienced additional developments. For instance, since 1998, the formed Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights was able to appoint a specialist on counter-terrorism and human rights.

Since 11 September 2001, the General Assembly and Commission have adopted resolutions concerning Human Rights plainly calling on the pertinent United Nations human rights contrivances in order to consider, within their orders, the defense of human rights and essential freedoms within the setting of measures to fight terrorism and to organize their efforts. As fitting, in order to endorse a reliable approach on this topic there must be focus on fundamentals.

The main fundamentals of that policy and the part of the United Nations in it are:

first, to discourage disaffected groups from picking terrorism as a course to achieve their objectives;

second, to negate terrorists the means with which to carry out their assaults;

third, to dissuade states from assisting terrorists;

fourth, to advance state capacity to avert terrorism; and Fifth, to protect human rights in the fight against terrorism.

The implications of the approach is that it is the initial instance that all member states agreed to a mutual strategic approach in combating terrorism, not only conveying a clear message terrorism is intolerable within all its manifestation and forms, but also determining to take practical steps collectively and individually in order to guarantee protection of human rights.

In terms of regional action, the OSCE serves as a regional inter-governmental body concerned mainly with mutual security. It has made a sum of politically obligatory commitments in connection to opposing terrorism. The aim of the OSCE is to generate a complete framework for stability and peace within the area. As such, OSCE conditions have recognized through assurances in what is known simply, "human dimension" that varied democracy based on the regulation of law and the assurance of human rights is the solitary system of government proficient in assuring such a complete framework for security, stability, and peace.

Effective actions to preserve human rights must be done on both the national and regional level aside from international dealings (Neumayer & Plumper, 2010). Without organizations like OSCE, regional conflicts and problems may be ignored in lieu of national or international concerns. The UN has clearly taken steps to promote awareness of human rights issues in connection with counter terrorism efforts. However, more is needed in terms of regional effort for countries experiencing a heavy amount of terrorist activity. One such country is the United States.

If the United States has in place an organization that looks to prevent human rights violations especially in areas the United States occupies internationally, there could be progress in reducing terrorist acts. Terrorists do not respond well to coercion and racial profiling. However, if their human rights are kept in mind and especially with the general population where the terrorists reside, perhaps this will lessen the likelihood of terrorist organizations getting financial support as well as new recruits. The news has made it clear that people within terrorist organizations are being funded by outside sources. These outside sources view countries like the United States as the enemy because of their ill treatment of their people.

The long-term realization of the United Nations' international counter-terrorism policy depends upon the safeguard of human rights. This is true on so many levels. However, there is an extreme lack of resources and will to advance or accomplish such goals. The first step towards enacting such goals is to provide standard regulations for preservation of human rights. This means accumulation of resources to provide and implement such standard.

The report released by the Center on Global Counterterrorism Cooperation shares the struggles the U.N. faces with limited resources. Another issue the UN has is a lack of coordination among agencies as well as a failure to screen compliance in countless nations. International, national, and local political front-runners may have strategies to guarantee that counterterrorism measures will not encroach upon human rights, but organizing them and placing them into action remains problematic, if not impossible. U.N. member states have to work and communicate with non-governmental organizations, including nonprofit agencies as well as political bodies to thrust the plan forward on the ground. Too frequently normal people are the disremembered players in all of it.

However, such groups can be prized allies in raising consciousness of human rights abuses between ordinary citizens, whose support and influence should not be overlooked. A major problem in compliance and understanding is the fact that rules and other materials, printed by NGOs as well as other groups, are sometimes either overly broad or legalistic. Comte's handbook lists circumstances that political leaders should reflect on before they discuss and enact counterterrorism laws. Firstly, counterterrorism law should conform to human rights law. Secondly, freedoms or rights controlled by counterterrorism measures should permit for limitations. Finally, third, counterterrorism laws should be established by due process and should be necessary, as well as proportional. It remains a sensitive issue however.

Under the supports of the "war against terror," an activist, pre-emptive method to (inter) national security, considered New Labor's period of political authority in the UK. This tactic was nationally embedded in precise counter-terrorism actions such as postponements to imprisonment without charge, the increase of stop and search measures as well as the placement of control orders. Positioned in this context, counter-terrorism policies have succeeded in replicating a state of incomplete securities in, from end to end which certain groups are protected, and which others are subjected to scrutiny and hostility. The same can be said of the United States and even in recent times, France.

As more and more terrorist attack happen, it is becoming clear the goal the UN has to integrate human rights with counter-terrorism measures is being ignored by countries. This is because people remain unaware of the harm not applying human rights law can mean in the future. All people care about is the "war on terror" and not so much in trying to see the "big picture." There is much left to cover concerning thwarting terrorism. Most of which is being worsened by the latest policies on apprehension and treatment of potential terrorist suspects.

Counter-terrorism communities must combine into their policies the second and third order properties of their pre-emptive activities into their strategic actions, and agree to a bigger human security approach that will deliver long-term maintainable security. Self-governing states must be more cautious with their policy and avoid offensive counter-terrorism (especially torture and targeted murders) in order to avert further boomerang effects, revival of the eradicated terrorist nodes, and harm to democratic standards. It must be a team effort or else things will simply fall to the wayside as it always does when it comes to human rights and counter-terorrism.