Custodial torture and abuse of power of law by the enforcing machineries like police is not only peculiar but it is widespread in this democratic country. It has been the concern of international community as the problem is universal and challenge is almost global. The Article 5 of the Universal declaration of Human Rights, 1948 clearly states that "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment". Further, Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 also states in a similar way. India has already ratified the aforesaid declaration and covenant. Despite such ratification, the custodial crime continues unabated. In all custodial crimes what is of real importance is not only infliction of body pain but the mental agony which a person undergoes within the four walls of police lock-up.
The word “custodial torture” is not defined any procedure laws nor in substantive laws. But this word is associated with two words that is “custody” and “torture”. As per the dictionary the meaning of word “custody” is the protective care or guardianship of someone. And in case of police custody, arrest, detention and imprisonment is also called
…show more content…
Basu judgement, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that custodial death is perhaps one of the worst crimes in a civilized society governed by the rule of law. During 2010-2011, the highest number of death in police custody was reported from Maharashtra a number of cases the police claimed that the accused committed suicide in police detention. However, the mystery over as to what had led them to take the extreme act and how they commit suicide with strange objects like shoe laces, blankets, jeans, etc are never answered.A large number of victims who are hale and healthy prior to their arrest suddenly develop medical complications once they are taken into custody and die in police custody. In reality, the victims are subjected to torture and
Mohandas K. Gandhi, an Indian nationalist who advocated civil disobedience, said, “You can chain me, you can torture me, you can even destroy this body, but you will never imprison my mind.”. In other words, Gandhi means that no amount of agony will cause him to change his beliefs. He implies that no matter what way he experiences abuse, the British will not be able to stop him and his fight for independence. No physical barrier can hinder Gandhi’s capability to stand for what he believes in. Throughout his life, Gandhi crossed paths with the police and was in and out of jail.
This is for sure going against the article number 5 in the universal declaration, “Nobody has any right to hurt us or to torture us”. As human beings if we have done nothing wrong even if we did anything wrong we have no right to be physically abused. Another example is when Elie Wiesels father states when Elie asked if he had eaten, “They didn’t give us anything… they said that we were sick, that we would die soon, and that it would be a waste of food” (Wiesel 107). This proves that the physical cruel treatment is happening to human rights because they are not being fed when they do not
At the point when managing Capital Punishment there are a wide range of strategies they use in the detainment facilities. Presently the act of the death penalty is as old as the administration itself. The death penalty is a legitimate infusion of capital punishment in which it is utilized for lawbreakers. As I would like to think, the demise of the criminal I think it rely on upon the individual whom did the wrongdoing and in addition the casualty family whom ought to have the capacity to see the crooks passing not the entire world. In the wake of perusing and doing research on the death penalty it has its genius and cons which will be clarify later.
To many, violation of human rights is a serious issue. This shows that for every negative force, there is always someone who recognizes the wrong and seeks to correct
Atul Gawande, surgeon, professor of surgery at Harvard and public health researcher, explores his view on the death penalty and the research that shook his views. Gawande’s personal view on the death penalty has been transformed by the research conducted for his story “Doctors of the Death Chamber”. In this story doctors and nurses give personal accounts of their controversial roles in prison executions. Gawande’s story about capital punishment raises the question: “Is medicine being used as an instrument of death?” Prior to 1982 the United States carried out executions through hanging, gas chambers, firing squads, and electrocution.
1. What is the definition of custody and treatment? a. Custody: the activities within a prison that control inmate behavior and maintain order. b. Treatment: “is the creation of an environment and provision of rehabilitative programs that encourage inmates to accept responsibility and to address personal disorders that make success in the community more difficult.” 2.
My opposition to torture fall under the beliefs of the absolutist Kant, who states that no matter what the circumstance is, something that is wrong will always be wrong (Boothe 2006, 12). Therefore, concerning the issue of torture, in this world or any other world, torture is immoral. In this paper, I will employ the ethical frameworks of virtue, rights, and fairness to argue against torture when viewed from the perspective of the victim, the torturer, and any outside source. Furthermore, I will dismantle the ticking-bomb scenario by deducing the incapability to achieve full certainty deeming these scenarios unrealistic.
Rules: With regard to international armed conflicts, the four Geneva Conventions (GC I to IV) and Additional Protocol I and II contain various provisions specifically dealing with both of Prisoners of War, Civilians protection to prevent any kind of violations that may happen toward them. The Forth Geneva convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War has set rules governing the issue of civilians who found themselves under enemy’s possession. Article 5 of the 4th GC has identified who are protected persons with putting conditions to be considered as protected with the privileges of having the statue of protected persons at article 27 of the same convention. Third Geneva Convention in particular has recognized group of rights with regarded to POWs such as the right to be humanely treated at article 13, correspondence at article 71, the right to gain a sufficient food in quantity and quality at article 26 and the right to not be subjected to torture and question at article 17 where every prisoner of war “when questioned on the subject, is bound to give only his surname, first names and rank, date of birth, and army, regimental, personal or serial number, or failing this, equivalent information” Moreover, the use of weapons and means that have indiscriminate effects such as poisonous gas and bombs which also would aggravate the suffering recognized as prohibited to use due to the amount of damage it causes upon civilians as well as the environment
In discussions of torture, one controversial issue has been whether torture is an effective mean to gain information from terrorists. On the one hand, many people would argue that torture is a very effective mean to gain information. On the other hand, there is a large amount of people who contends that torture is not the only means to gain the same information. My own view is that there are better ways to gain information from terrorists other than torturing them. I disagree with torture being an effective mean to gain information because; as recent research has shown it can be ineffective.
In medieval times, torture was used to punish criminals, deter crime, and gather information. There were many different types of tortures, most of which were brutal and painful. At the time, torture was deemed necessary to maintain order. Laws were harsh and torture was severe, but effective form of punishment. Despite its effectiveness, torture was often an unfair and extremely cruel punishment, and should have been eliminated in all forms.
Most importantly, article five directly states, “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”
The kidnapper was prosecuted and sentenced to life imprisonment; however the officer ‘was also prosecuted and convicted of violating the kidnappers rights’ (Sandel, 2011). This presents an interesting moral dilemma, can torture ever be justified? And was the officer acting in a morally respectable way? In this essay I will answer these questions by analysing the arguments which justify or condemn his actions, from both the utilitarian and deontological perspectives.
In Defense of Torture “Because It Is Wrong:” A Meditation on Torture Rules Should Govern Torture, Dershowitz Says What ethical arguments are being made? Torture is okay to use. Torture is wrong. Torture should be okay in some circumstances
Introduction In this article, Eric Poser has elaborated several reasons which made human rights a failure in international legal regime. The most highlighted issues are hypocrite policies of US and EU which has directly questioned credibility and integrity of their law and justice. The second reason is role played by Russia and China, the two major economic powers who in order to sustain their power, are involved in human rights violations. The third most important reason is standardized model of Universal Declaration of Human Rights which is ideal but not practical in various countries.
LICEING THE 21ST CENTURY The police are the public and the public are the police - Robert peel When we talk about the criminal justice system the public at large plays a very important role right from the prevention to reporting to the investigation of the case. The criminal justice system cannot achieve its goal without the active participation of the general public. If we take a look at the ancient police setup in medivial and ancient india we come across that there were various provisions for the participation of the public working with the police. The word police, inspires confidence inspires a sense of truse, security, commitment, and public service.