Introducing
Your new presentation assistant.
Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.
Trending searches
By Antonia Lilja and Alex Richardson
1. no handing over to States where there is a risk of torture
2. the State should be involved in determining violations of human rights
Answer to question: no/unsure
1. prevent torture within territory
2. no exceptional circumstances
3. official orders may not be used as justification
Answer to question: no
*Deontological Perspective
1. "All acts of torture are offenses under [each State Party's] criminal law"
2. punishable
Answer to question: no
- Torture: "an act by a person acting under the colour of law specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain... upon another person within his custody" 18 U.S. Code 2340
CAT: - no exceptions
- no justification
- fair and adequate compensation
1. States shall take measures to establish these laws in cases of
a) territory
b) offender = citizen
c) victim = citizen (if appropriate)
2. when offender is on the territory
Answer to question: unsure/no
1. Waterboarding = torture ("any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflited on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him [...] information")
2. Valid within USA
- is against torture of any being
- is considerate of universal human rights
- not just focused on over all happiness of society
- emphasises importance of human dignity and respects people as individuals
- "against torture and other cruel... degrading treatment or punishment" (title)
-not in favour of torture in any circumstances
-violates fundamental rights of people as free and moral beings
- "inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world."
- individuals are not at the disposal of the society.
- "promote universal respect... human rights and fundamental freedom"
- self-possession
- rational beings worthy of dignity and respect, therefore no torture
- strong critique on utilitarianism
1. investigation by competent authorities
Answer to question: unsure
Utilitarianism: normative ethical theory which holds that the best way to excercise one's morality is to maximise aggregate human happiness. Form of consequentialism - social impact of action on society (Sandel, 2009)
Deontology: normative ethical theory which is more concerned with universal human rights and acting by our moral duties. Not consequentialism, focus on people's motives. (Sandel, 2009)
Deontological
1. compensation shall be given
Answer to question: unsure
References:
Questions ??
Discussion:
- President believes use of torture will "corrode the best of people"
- need to act freely and not just act purely to meet some kind of "end"
- cannot use people as form of "means"
- cannot justify killing civilians - US morally responsable for their death
- "stronger position" - choose outcome itself for its own worth
- differentiate humans from animals - not just desire orientated
- therefore, deontological
- Was threat of torture justified in the case of Jacob von Metzler?
a) Utilitarianism
b) Deontology
c) Your opinon?
- What about CAT? Was it followed in this case?
- Dish, T. (2010, June 30). The Legacy Media And Torture. Retrieved November 13, 2015, from http://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2010/06/the-legacy-media-and-torture/185284/
- Sandel, M. (2009). Chapter 2 and 5. In Justice: What's the right thing to do? New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
- Outlawing an ancient evil - torture: Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. (1984). New York: Dept. of Public Information, United Nations.
- 8 U.S. Code § 2340
-Torture Utilitarian Against Torture by President Barack Obama