Richard S. Matthews - The Absolute Violation. Why Torture Must Be Prohibited

THE ABSOLUET VIOLATION

Why Torture Must Be Prohibited

RICHARD MATH

McGill-Queens University Press 2008

ISBN 978-0-7735-3422-3 (cloth)
ISBN 978-0-7735-3451-3 (paper)

Legal deposit third quarter 2008
Bibliothque nationale du Qubec

Printed in Canada on acid-free paper that is 100% ancient forest free (100% post-consumer recycled), processed chlorine free.

This book has been published with the help of a grant from the Canadian Federation for the Humanities and Social Sciences, through the Aid to Scholarly Publications Program, using funds provided by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

McGill-Queens University Press acknowledges the support of the Canada Council for the Arts for our publishing program. We also acknowledge the financial support of the Government of Canada through the Book Publishing Industry Development Program (BPIDP) for our publishing activities.

Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication

Matthews, Richard

The absolute violation: why torture must be prohibited / Richard Matthews.

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 978-0-7735-3422-3 (bnd)
ISBN 978-0-7735-3451-3 (pbk)

1. Torture. 2. Torture Moral and ethical aspects. 3. Torture victims. I. Title.

HV8593.M355 2008 323.4'9 C2008-901695-5

Typeset in Sabon 10.5/13
by Infoscan Collette, Quebec City

In memory of my father

DR KEITH MATTHEWS

Having finished this book, I now understand why no author writes a book alone. Without the friendship and the intellectual and moral support of a lot of friends and family members, I could never have finished this book. To be honest, I doubt that I would ever have had the courage to start. Some read drafts of chapters, others contributed insights through conversations, and all simply believed in me and the importance of the project.

Heidi Matthews (LLB, LLM cand.) is one of the brightest individuals Ive had the good fortune to befriend. She convinced me to start the project and contributed much valuable critical commentary and moral support. Dr Sean McGrath of Memorial University of Newfoundland read a draft of the introduction and provided enthusiastic debate and encouragement throughout. Dr John Scott taught me the first philosophy course I ever took. He convinced me early of the necessity for politically engaged philosophy and continues to mentor me now, having read drafts of the introduction and the fourth chapter. He has never turned down a request for time or aid since I first sat in his class. In spite of two very young children and a busy job, Jordan Furlong (LLB) managed to find time to edit the chapter on law and torture. His expertise both as an editor and in the field of law was a wonderful gift to me. Additionally, I was very angry at the time, and he patiently convinced me to tone down some of the more impassioned remarks. We have been friends for a very long time, and he demonstrated friendships virtue once again.

My colleagues and friends at Mount Allison University, Dr Paul Bogaard and Dr Roopen Majithia, both supported me through dialogue and provided me with the opportunity and the peace to devote myself to the extensive research needed to pursue this project. Their encouragement was crucial. As well, Mount Allison University provided me with the office space and library facilities to carry out my work.

I had the good fortune to test each of the central theses on a lecture tour of Australia in February 2007. Dr Barbara Hocking and the Association for Canadian Studies in Australia and New Zealand were kind enough to provide me with a grant; the graduate students and faculty of the Queensland University of Technology warmly hosted me. In particular I want to thank Ms Jenny Jones, Ms Eleanor Milligan, Dr Peter Isaacs, Mr David Massey, and Dr Trevor Jordan. The experience and criticisms strengthened the book considerably.

I would also like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their extensive and constructive comments on the manuscript. It has been enriched considerably by their expertise. Likewise, I wish to express my deep appreciation to Philip Cercone, Robert Lewis, Ligy Allakattussery, Joanne Pisano, Joan McGilvray, and the other staff at McGill-Queens University Press.

My family, Dr Kathleen Matthews, Dr Clare Matthews, Katy Matthews (LLB), and Keith Matthews (MBA), enthusiastically backed me throughout a very long and challenging period. I hope they understand how much their belief in me continues to mean.

Three friends have offered me particularly important support. Ive shared many doubts and conversations on politics with Michael Jacobs, who consistently offers great insight. And Sean Windsor and Raymond Hartery have each contributed vitally as well, notably by helping me to appreciate the institutional realities that govern military decision making.

Above all, my partner, Emma Woodley, has been essential. A book of this nature is occasionally painful to research and write. As important as it is, a week spent reading nothing but human rights reports and the consequent horror stories does little for the spirit. At every key moment, she literally held me together and gave me the strength to continue. Not only did she offer me love, strength, and emotional support, but she also offered me the benefit of her considerable radical feminist insights into gender issues and patriarchy by criticizing the crucial first chapter of the book and suggesting important additional texts for inclusion, such as one by Susan Brison. In addition, she is the best editor Ive ever worked with and has provided invaluable help proofreading the book. I am blessed by her.

To the extent that the book works, it is because of them. Any errors, of course, are mine.

THE ABSOLUTE VIOLATION

This is a question of serving the dignity of man [sic] by methods that remain dignified in the midst of a history that is not.

Camus 1991, 76

Prior to 11 September 2001 those unfamiliar with human rights work would probably have accepted the commonplace that torture had been eradicated from the civilized world. It was reserved for violent Third World dictatorships and communists, something that they do, not we. Anyone with a more nuanced knowledge of recent history and politics will be aware that the reality is rather uglier. Even so, there seems to be little awareness of the extent to which modern torture techniques were in fact developed by the most powerful industrialized states. There is also widespread ignorance of the extensive evidence demonstrating the use of torture by the United Kingdom, the United States of America, France, and other democracies since the end of the Second World War.

Alfred McCoys (2006b) fascinating history of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and torture explores in great detail the psychological research on torture performed in Canada and the United States in the 1950s and 1960s. These programs resulted in methods that were then field-tested and revised in Vietnam and in numerous Cold War counter-insurgencies across the globe over the past forty years. Darius Rejali (2007b, 8) traces the development of stealth tortures in modern democracies from early in the twentieth century. Analyzing the unnerving affinity between democracy and stealth torture, Rejali argues that exploration of stealth tortures is a consequence of governmental desires to escape public monitoring and accountability. The French developed their own theory of counter-insurgency warfare, with torture as a centrepiece of the program, in the Algerian War of the 1950s and then sent staff officers to Argentina and the United States to further disseminate their knowledge (Robin 2006, 467). The United Kingdom maintained at least one torture facility during the Second World War and immediately afterward, mainly, it seems, to gather intelligence about the Soviet Union in the early days of the Cold War (Cobain 2005). It also took advantage of American and French experience in torturing suspected Irish Republican Army (IRA) members in the early days of the troubles in Northern Ireland.