Is the use of torture ever justified in dealing with criminals and terrorists?

Torture as we all know is a very strong term used in the modern-day context. It can mean basic physical torture of even psychological torture. However, by addressing the question, the issue of whether the use of torture is justified in dealing with criminals and terrorists is a controversial issue.

When looking into the detailed picture, the usage of torture on criminals may sound more exaggerated then when it is said to be used on terrorists. The basic so-called “qualification” to be a criminal is probably a snatch theft or robbery. In such cases, is there a need to use torture to suck out the truth from these “criminals”? In my opinion, I would obviously disagree to the point. No one in the world has the right to harm others for their own good. In this case, using torture against these criminals is just a way to attain a specific truth out of these people for the authorities’ own good. Hence this is rightfully wrong and should not be practiced.

However, some may pull out their own side of their stories by stating the various incidents that have occurred that crushed the lives of many innocent people, by certain selfish terrorist groups. Hence, in doing so, the usage of torture on this group of people is ethically right. This opinion, in my view is merely one that is felt through uprising emotions in the affected people. In the fit of anger and hatred, they hope that the perpetrators will get punished rightfully for their mistakes and if these people are not cooperative with the officials, then the usage of torture must be implemented promptly. A clear example was the September 9/11 attacks that occurred in the US. This incident apparently trampled many innocent lives and stirred up much feeling in their loved ones that they would do anything to ensure that terrorists involved were tortured till they admitted the truth of what actually happened.

Similarly, torture is just a means of getting the truth out of convicted personnel. However, what makes it so certain that it is the ONLY way that can be used to bring the truth to light. Has anyone asked the question of whether the convict will still remain stubborn and not let out the truth even after undergoing serious torture? In this case, what was the use of torture then? Merely to take revenge on the convict? To prove a point that the authorities have the most power? If not then what exactly is it?

Therefore, in my opinion, I feel strongly and slant towards the fact that I deem the usage of torture on criminals and terrorists to be unjustifiable. I came to this conclusion after several thoughts and feel that no one has the right to harm others. In this case, if the authorities still use torture on the terrorists and convicts, then what makes them any better from the terrorists who also caused harm to others?

-V.Nandeeshwar ( Post for the previous week)