Abstract:
Terrorism is a global
problem. It cannot be resolved without global solutions which must be based on
the International legal framework. It is, however, has become the top political
priority since the attack of 11th September 2001. Moreover, the
sufferings, threat and calamities were considered as the direct assault on the
Fundamental values of Human Rights, freedom, democracy and the ‘Rule of Law’.
Day by day, the
situation is going bad to worse. So the aspect of Human Rights are even more
important and greater vigilance and watch is required for the same. On the
other hand, the UN guidelines in terrorism and Human Rights are a complex one.
The guidelines which were designed to serve as a realistic, pragmatic guide for
the anti-terrorism policies are not taken into consideration on the ground
level. Hence, the guidelines are ineffective. In such situations of crisis, we
will have to consider the provisions for the elimination of terrorism.
The UN has said that
the counter-terrorism measures must be balanced and must always consider the
protection and preservation of human dignity, personality, freedom, peace and
amity. It is, therefore, the high time to combat the means of terrorism and
adopt new measures and approaches to make the society free from this malaise.
This Article, we believe will provide ground realities of counter-terrorism and
its aftermath.
Keywords: International legal framework,
Anti-terrorism policies, United Nations, Counter-terrorism.
Introduction:
“If
anyone slays a human being shall be as though he had slain all mankind; whereas,
if anyone saves a life, it shall be as though he had saved the lives of all mankind.”
- The Holy Quran (5:32)
Terrorism has emerged
as new threat to the globe. The phenomenon of terrorism is as old as the
civilization. It has grown with the growth of the history of mankind and
conception of a state. This is one of the most important phenomena of our
contemporary world. It is a phenomenon in which terrorists adapt them according
to the environment in which they live. The issue of terrorism is not a problem
of one country or government but rather an issue which requires cooperation
among many nations. Terrorism is a politically loaded term. A terrorist can be
very well perceived as a freedom fighter to another. Terrorism is defined by
its method and not by its goal, which have always been of diverse character.
Terrorism breeds from a perceived sense of oppression, injustice and
inequality. Terrorist therefore believes that their use of violence is morally
and politically justifiable.[1] So
far as Human Rights are concerned, Human rights are those moral rights which
are owed to each man or woman by every man or woman solely by reason of being
human. Human Rights are distinguished by moral rights possessing the inherent
characteristics of universality, individuality, paramountcy, practicability and
enforceability.[2]
The former UN
Secretary General, Kofi Annan said that “terrorism
is in itself a
direct attack on human rights and the rule of law. If we sacrifice them in our
response, we are
handing a victory to the terrorists.”[3]
Terrorism:
As a matter of fact,
terrorists continue to threaten mankind because there is no commonly agreed
definition of the term, hence no punitive action against the perpetrator is
possible either by the state or international organization.[4]
It further classifies
that a terrorist uses violence to cause terror for political ends. Needless to point
out that both ‘terrorism’ and ‘terrorists’ are the nouns of ‘terror’ which
itself is a well-known term.[5]
Terrorism may be defined as an act of organized vigilance to create
chaos and disorder for achieving the goals which in normal course cannot be
realized within the framework of legal and constitutional institutions. It is
an act of intimidation seeking to subjugate the people and the governments into
acceptance of their point of view and also the methodology to propagate it.[6]
The nature of terrorism
is political so is its objective. Its political identity could be analyzed by
various issues involved in terrorism like objective, methods, and the
organizational structure. The objective of a terrorist group is invariably
political such as autonomy or secession to acquire political power. Social and
economic issues are not primary to them. They believe that once the political
power comes in their hand, social and economic reform would follow by itself.
Thus, to acquire political power is their sole aim. Not economic prosperity.
Their target of violence is also related to politics as they aim to kill
political leaders and destroy political institutions to malign credibility of
the government concerned.[7]
Counter
Terrorism:
Just as terrorism impacts on
human rights and the functioning of society, so too can measures adopted by
States to counter terrorism. As mentioned above, because terrorism has a
serious impact on a range of fundamental human rights, States have not only a right
but a duty to take effective counter-terrorism measures. Effective
counter-terrorism measures and the protection of human rights are complementary
and mutually reinforcing objectives which must be pursued together as part of
States’ duty to protect individuals within their jurisdiction.
Human
Rights:
According to
traditional concept of international law, human rights are protected and
violated by the State. Generally speaking, human rights involve obligations of
states towards individuals. The whole movement for the protection of human
rights arose as an attempt to redress the balance between the power of the
state to impose duties on the individuals and the powerlessness of the
individuals to ensure correlative respect for their rights. The issue of the
responsibility of non-state actors as perpetrators of human rights abuses has
thus become important. In that context it is being pointed out that it was
somewhat ironic to talk about the enjoyment of human rights in conditions of
massive killings by terrorist groups.[8]
So far as the
development of human rights are concerned, prior to 1945 the matter of human
rights was between a nation and persons within its territory as an issue of local
and domestic jurisdiction which was beyond the hands of international authority
and power. The issue of human rights was first solved by the Charter of United
Nations (1st international instrument). In 1948, the UN declared the
universal declaration of human rights which imposed upon the new established
organization a fundamental obligation to promote human rights and fundamental
freedom among all people without regards to race, sex, languages, religion and
country. The UN celebrates human rights celebrates with ritualistic regularity.
The declaration of human rights by UN was widely recognized as the universal
declaration of human rights on 10th Dec. 1948 as a common standard
of achievement for all people and all nations. The declaration being merely a
resolution of the United Nations, was not legally binding. In order to give
legal form to the provisions of declaration, normative cognizance were
suggested for adoption in future. Consequently between 1951 and 1968, the UN
adopted 15 conventions, 2 covenants, 2 protocols, 1 optional protocol and one
declaration. Of this, 21 instruments, the 2 covenants and the optional protocol
were designed to protect human rights.[9]
Terrorism,
Law and Judiciary:
Disregard and contempt
of human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the
conscience of mankind, and the advent of the World War I which human beings
shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has
been proclaim as the highest aspirations of the common people.[10]
Many international covenants on human rights and national Constitutions guarantee
the right to life, liberty and security of the person.[11]
International
conventions on terrorism:
Broadly speaking there
are two types of international convention on terrorism.
·
There are truly international
conventions which are open to ratification to all states. There are thirteen
international conventions at present.
·
Second there are multilateral terrorist
conventions, such as council of Europe convention on the prevention of
terrorism (2006); the Inter-American convention against terrorism (2002); and
the organization of African union convention on the prevention and combating of
terrorism (1999) and protocol (2004).[12]
Conventions
which are open to ratification by all states:
The following list
identifies the major terrorist conventions open to ratification by all states.
A brief summary is provided in each case of the principal provisions in each
instrument. Most of the conventions provide that parties must establish
criminal jurisdiction over offenders. (e.g., the state where the offence takes
place, or some cases the state of nationality of the perpetrator or victim, or
in the case of an aircraft, the state of registration.
Some
of the important conventions for combating international terrorism are
mentioned below;
1.
1993 convention on offences and certain
other acts committed on board aircraft ( Aircraft convention)
2.
1970 Convention for the Suppression of
Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft ( Unlawful Seizure Convention)
3.
1971 convention for the suppression of
the unlawful acts against the safety of civil aviation ( civil aviation
convention)
4.
1973 Convention on the prevention and punishment
of crimes against internationally protected persons ( diplomatic agents
convention)
5.
1979 international convention against
the taking of hostages (hostages convention)
6.
1980 convention on the physical
protection nuclear material ( nuclear materials convention)[13]
7.
The 1971 convention to prevent and
punish the acts of terrorism taking the form of crimes against persons and
related extortion that are of international significance.[14]
Experience
shows that is government who has committed the maximum number of acts violating
the human rights of citizens worldwide. History proves that people in power
have arbitrarily and whoever exposes then runs the risk of state power being
used against them.
It
is the need of the hour to sit together and think together and try to tackle
the terrorism as universal phenomenon.
That
the sale of arms by international companies to non-state entities shall be
completely banned;
That
the state shall not render any kind of support to sub-nationalist tendencies in
another state;
That
if the international concern is not forthcoming, then the third world countries
should strive hard to enter into bilateral and multilateral agreements to
counter terrorism, e.g., the bilateral treaty entered into between India and
Sri Lanka to fight terrorism.
Conclusion:
The United Nations Global
Counter-Terrorism Strategy was adopted by the General Assembly on 8 September
2006. This marks the first time that Member States have agreed to a
comprehensive, global strategic framework to counter terrorism. The strategy
spells out concrete measures for Member States to take individually as well as
collectively to: address the conditions
conducive to the spread of terrorism, prevent and combat terrorism and
strengthen their individual and collective capacity to do so, and protect human
rights and uphold the rule of law while countering terrorism. The strategy
calls for Member States to work with the United Nations system to implement the
provisions of the plan of action contained in the strategy and at the same time
calls for United Nations entities to assist Member States in their efforts. The
United Nations departments, programs, funds and agencies have been taking actions
in a number of areas in line with the strategy both in their individual
capacity and through joint efforts in the framework of the Counter-Terrorism
Implementation Task Force (CTITF).
The questions which
quite often arise are that how does terrorism come into existence? Who are the terrorists?
How to eradicate and combat terrorism? How to get rid of this malaise? How to
provide human rights to the fullest extent? To find answers to these questions
are sine qua non. This will require an honest and sincere analysis of the situation
to find out a peaceful solution for this dreadful and chronic disease against
humanity. By waging a war, nations can be conquered but not peace, amity,
unity, freedom and brotherhood. Terrorists could be killed but not terrorism
and destruction. It is, therefore, not force that eradicates terrorism from the
society. It is justice, compassion, equality, egalitarian society, love and
affection across races that will eradicate terror and terrorism. It is
simplicity, help, love, mutual understanding and respect for their fellow human
beings for their very existence. Let’s join our hands together and leave no
stone unturned in the endeavor of making this society free from all barriers,
hindrances and making this world a better and peaceful place to live for now
and for generations to come.
[1]
Martha Renshaw, Terrorism, Legitimacy and
Power: The consequences of political violence 33-34 (Wasleyan University
Press, Middletown, 1983)
[2]
Macfarlance. L. J., The Theory and
Practice of Human Rights 42 (Dartmouth Publishing Co Ltd, London, 1st Ed., 1985)
[3]
Kofi
Annan, A Global Strategy for Fighting
Terrorism‘, Keynote address to the Closing Plenary of the International Summit
on Democracy, Terrorism and Security on March 10, 2005 available
at<http://english.safedemocracy.
org/keynotes/a-global-strategy-for-fighting-terrorism.html
>(accessed on 21st February 2014)
[4]
Prabha, Kshitij, Terrorism- An Instrument
of Foreign Policy 13 (South Asian Publishers, New Delhi, 2000)
[5]
Sehgal, B.P., Global Terrorism- Socio-
Politico and Legal Dimensions 59 (Deep and Deep Publications, New Delhi,
1995)
[6]
Sadhu, A.N. “Evolution of Terrorism in Ibid B.P. Singh Sehgal, p.11
[8]
Narang, A.S., Terrorism and Human Rights, A.S. Narang Pramila Srivastava, Terrorism: The Global Perspective
178-179 (Kanishka Publishers & Distributors, New Delhi, 2001)
[9] Singh,
Gurcharan, State Terrorism and Human
Rights & Sehgal B.P. Singh, Global
Terrorism-Socio-Politico and Legal Dimensions 186 (Deep and Deep Publications,
New Delhi, 1995)
[10]
Preamble to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948
[11]
Like Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 5th
and 4th amendments to US constitution and Article 21 of the Indian
Constitution
[12]
Helen Duffy, The War on Terror and the
Framework of International Law (Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 2005)
[13]
Ibid.
[14]
Signed at Washington on February 2, 1971 by columbium, Costa Rice, Dominican
Republic Jamaica, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, El – Salvadore, Trinidad
and Tobago- USA, Uruguay and Venezuela
No comments:
Post a Comment