Basic argument for
the elimination of police torture
A speech by Basil Fernando,
Director for Policy and Programme Development at the Asian Human
Rights Commission, Hong Kong. The speech was delivered at the Meeting
of Asian Parliamentarians in Hong Kong on the 22 July 2012, as part of
the Asian Alliance against Torture and Ill-treatment.
What does police torture
mean?
If we were to ask this
question, and then proceed to answer it, someone may ask in turn,
“Wait, how do you know?” It would take us into realms of epistemology:
“how do we know anything?”
Such a question been asked
through the ages. And, one answer that has emerged in the last few
centuries is that one knows by the collection and observation of data.
Our age is symbolized by the images of the telescope and the
microscope. And today, we answer questions about what something means
through observation and analysis of data.
What about the data on
torture?
This data is present in the
actual stories of victims of torture. The approach of studying torture
through the stories of victims differs from the study of mere
statistics. Through stories accurately recorded, we can know what
torture is, why it happens, and answer all other associated questions.
What does the known data on
torture tell us? What it tells us is of the contradictions in our
institutions. Observation and analysis of this data reveals to us the
malfunctioning of institutions, which defeat the possibility of
achieving rule of law. The study of torture thereby becomes a study of
the basic structure of key institutions in our societies, and their
peculiar defects.
The data garnered from the
stories of victims reveals to us the utter stupidity of the way our
major institutions function. It follows that torture is not simply a
study of cruelty. Rather, it is more a study about the stupidity that
has become a part of the way our institutions function.
Thus, asking a question like
“what is the meaning of torture?” is like asking the meaning of
pneumonia, malaria, or any other disease. Today, the methods of
studying such diseases have been well-established. The same principles
can be used to study the diseases that afflict our basic institutions.
Democracy, without
functioning institutions, is a meaningless expression, an empty
balloon floating through space. Democracy, if it is to be meaningful,
is about functioning public institutions. The measure of
well-functioning institutions is the way such institutions are capable
of functioning under the rule of law. When a public institution is
dysfunctional, from the point of view of rule of law, it means that
such an institution has ceased to be an institution of democracy, and
has transformed into something else.
In our societies, where
police torture is widespread, what we are experiencing are public
institutions which have become "something else." This "something else"
may have gone as far as totalitarianism, or it may be along the path
to such an "ism", but what we can be sure of is that such institutions
have not only become non-democratic, they have become an obstacle to
democracy.
In countries where there is
widespread use of torture, there is also a belief, particularly among
the leaders and operators of public institutions, that policing
without torture is impossible. However, the opposite is a more direct
reflection of reality. When torture is a widespread practice,
policing, in its democratic sense, becomes impossible.
The above reflections are on
the very basics of the discussions we have had yesterday.
As for AHRC, such
discussions started almost fifteen years back. We have answered
questions by stubbornly continuing with the methodology of studying
torture via accurately recording stories of victims, day in and day
out. Our documentation is testimony to the pursuit of finding-out the
meaning of torture through such study of stories. Our maxim in our
early days was "go from micro to macro”, which meant “to know through
individual stories of torture the problems of the basic structure of
society."
When we know about these
stories, the knowledge we have about the basic structure of our
societies is explained in a very different way to what it is normally
believed or declared to be.
This is why the study of the
widespread practice of torture and the exposure of it is a vital part
of undoing what is wrong with the basic structure of our societies. It
is from this point of view that dealing with the issue of police
torture becomes an unavoidable task for anyone who is committed to the
pursuit of democracy in our societies.
Elimination of police
torture is one of the most essential tasks in working towards
democratization of our societies. It is a practical way of getting
about undoing the institutional obstacles to democracy.
It is this approach that the
Asian Human Rights Commission is presenting to the participants in
this meeting. And, in particular, AHRC is asking the legislators to
take this approach seriously in the strategies that they develop to
fight for the establishment of democracy.
The elimination of torture
and the enabling of the freedom of speech are inseparably linked. When
the possibility of the practice of torture is reduced, if not fully
eliminated, the psychological conditions for the freedom of speech are
thereby created. And the core element of democracy is the freedom of
speech. It is through the freedom of speech that we are able to get
the views of many, if not all, and thereby develop a collective
consciousness with the participation of all. Thus, in the development
of civic sense and in the development of people’s participation, the
elimination of torture is an essential component.