Educating torture
'experts' is pointless
A Statement by the
Asian Human Rights Commission
August 24, 2010
The widely publicised
video of a police torture has drawn mixed reactions and opinions from
the public, including lawmakers, lawyers and human rights groups, who
have all joined in the chorus condemning such a barbaric and cruel
act. Most of them share the opinion that 'lack of education of the law
enforcers' is to blame for it happening but the Asian Human Rights
Commission (AHRC) strongly argues that this is not the case.
While educating law
enforcers about the content of the Anti-Torture Act of 2009 is
necessary the lack of education of this law cannot be used as an
excuse to justify the said incident. If there is anyone who are
'experts and well-educated' on the use of torture, it is the law
enforcement officers themselves. Torture is not something so new that
one has to be told that it is abhorrent and prohibited.
The enactment of the
Anti-Torture Act in December 2009 did not mean that the term 'torture'
just came into existence and was an alien concept to the law
enforcers. The term torture itself has been widely used and understood
to refer to violence and cruelty perpetrated against a person. Before
the right not to be tortured was included in the 1987 Constitution,
the police and the military had already been practicing it,
particularly during Martial law period against political dissenters.
Therefore, it would be too naïve to argue that the lack of education
amongst law enforcers is to blame as to why it continues to persist.
For any police officer who thinks with reason, torture is absolutely a
condemnable act undeserving of those who wear the uniform of the
Philippine National Police.
Some of the authors of
the Anti-Torture Law were victims of torture themselves during the
Martial Law regime. It is their experience, and that of countless
others, that made the enactment of this law possible. It was also
after the Marcos regime that the concept of the right against torture
was first introduced in the Philippine Constitution. The torture
victims, most of them in disbelief as to how cruel people of their own
nationality could become, felt the depth of what torture really is. It
meant being a witness of their own suffering long before this was
written into law. Those who 'survived' have to suffer and live with
the trauma of having been tortured for the rest of their lives.
Torture is not a
result of ignorance and lack of education by the law enforcers. It is
the absence of an effective mechanism that would hold them
accountable. It is also this absence that breeds and develops a
culture of violence amongst the law enforcers. When a law enforcer or
torturer cannot be held accountable for torture or any other form of
violence he would commit, this becomes an accepted norm which we know
to have been thriving in the police force for decades. This is what
happened in the
Philippines.
The policeman who tortured the suspected thief in the video did not
become a torturer overnight, but had learnt and developed his
expertise of using torture and the accompanying mindset to an extent
that has become acceptable to him because it is a commonplace
practice.
Filipino policemen
also do not become police officers overnight. The Philippine National
Police (PNP) and the National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM), two
agencies who are responsible in training and recruiting applicants
into the police force, require highly competitive academic
qualifications, accomplishments and intensive training before it
awards a policeman the rank of a police captain, the rank that the
policeman in the video held. They also undergo civil service
examinations, regular background checks and continuing education on
law enforcement.
Also, the Philippine
National Police Academy (PNPA), one of the highly competitive police
training academies, even conduct background checks of their recruits,
by way if interviewing their family and persons who know the
applicant, before admitting him for training to ensure that immoral
persons or those with psychological problems would not be allowed in
the academy. This is in addition to passing a lengthy qualifying
examination.
Apart from training in
the police academy, the
PNP and NAPOLCOM also absorb applicants with a bachelor's degree in
criminology and those who had already earned units from any social
sciences course but were unable to graduate. This is also after
passing a civil service examination. Thus, those who are absorbed into
the police force are either university graduates or have studied for
years in a university. They are educated people and need not be told
that torture is prohibited. They are have completed, at least the
rudimentary teaching on logic, ethics, philosophy and the morals in
the universities. They are certainly not uneducated.
When the policeman
tortured the victim in the video, he did it consciously. It was not
indiscriminate or an isolated case, as earlier mentioned by the police
establishment. It reflects the tip of the iceberg as to the state of
policing in country. The emergence of further complaints on torture as
reported in the media, after the video had been exposed, only
demonstrates the ugly reality of the country's policing the surface of
which has yet to be scratched. It is a matter that most of the people
knew and had live with. Any further complaints must therefore be
seriously acted upon under the law.