As promised the study guide is now online !
Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism
The September 11th attack on the United States, the 2008 Mumbai shootings and bombings,and the periodic suicide bomber attacks in Iraq are only a taste of the terrorism occurring in the 21st century.
Though the United Nations has not yet agreed-upon a definition for terrorism, it is usually referred to as an act of planned violence, motivated politically or otherwise, performed against civilian targets by non-official groups or agents aimed at influencing public opinion.
No country is immune to terrorism and because terrorism harms people physically and psychologically, it has become a very important social issue that this committee is obligated to address.
In response to the threat of terrorism, states have taken various counter-terrorism measures to ensure the safety of their nation and people.
However, these efforts do not always preserve international human rights standards. As a result, both the general populous and terror suspects are susceptible of having their rights violated.
When employing counterterrorism measures, many States commit basic human rights abuses,including frequent invocation of exceptional powers and limitations that are not always
justified.
Some aspects need special attention such as the respect for private life, deeply affected by the investigation methods that interfere with the privacy and the use of a
person's data by the State; the restriction of freedom of expression and access to information and the State interference on the media; the restriction to the right to own private property and the indefinite detention without charge of foreign nationals suspected of involvement in
terrorism.
Many countries face significant challenges in protecting their citizens against the threat of terrorism and, consequently, disobey the relevant legal framework regarding persons who are suspects of involvement with terrorist acts.
In the fight against terrorism, the rights of terrorist detainees are an issue of great contention.
One of the most relevant consequences of the fight against terrorism is the social claim for short-termed and urgent measures. In this context, States justify their counter terrorism tactics, even if they clearly violate the most fundamental human rights. This is particularly displayed when it comes to the detentions of persons captured or arrested because of suspected involvement with terrorism. In these incidences, the state may fail to respect their
legal framework and relevant procedural safeguards, depriving these detainees of all dignity.
The interrogation process of terrorist detainees is the most common source for a wide range of human rights violations.
Interrogation techniques including hooding, stripping detainees naked, subjecting them to extremes of heat, cold, noise and light, and deprivation of sleep
have been applied to people detained under the charge of terrorism while incarcerated.
These tactics exposes people to pain and humiliation and can eventually results in deaths under questionable circumstances.
The way interrogatories are conducted is fundamental to the "War on Terror". For some governments, this war is to be won with the discovery of information that could help preventing future attacks. For this reason, some States defend that cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment should not be completely prohibited, as in some exceptional circumstances they may be justified and even necessary.
The question herein lies:
Should counterterrorism impose more severe treatment on prisoners incarcerated for
terrorist activities than those incarcerated for civilian crimes? Are these interrogation
techniques valid when the State is obligated to protect their communities from terrorist
violence?
Closely related to the treatment dedicated to detainees is the right of any person to a fair trial.
Although this is an internationally recognized fundamental right, after the intensification of
the fight against terrorism, there has been intention on some parts to compromise this
principle in the name of security. But should fair trial standards be sacrificed to prosecute
terrorism? The right to a fair trial is guaranteed by both the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights and the Geneva Conventions for the Protection of Victims of Armed
Conflict. Other provisions of the Covenant consist of the protection of the defendant's right
to be presumed innocent; right to be informed promptly of the charges; to be tried without undue delay; to be tried in his presence; to defend himself in person or through legal assistance; to communicate with counsel; to examine, or have examined, the witnesses against him; not to be compelled to testify against himself or to confess guilt; and to have any conviction and sentence reviewed by a higher tribunal according to law.
However, many argue that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to terrorism and that when people commit such atrocities against civilian populations, they forfeit such legal rights. Are the abuses on prisons warranted? If not, how can they be avoided and controlled by the international
community and also how does international humanitarian law applies to the fight against
terrorism.
There should be no contradiction between effective counterterrorism measures and protection of human rights. It must be assumed, then, that the dignity of all the people must be protected even in urgent events, especially avoiding injustice to a specific group.
When fighting terrorism, States should pay further attention to the effects of the adopted counter terrorism measures and to the risk of damaging the rule of law.
The scope of this topic is very broad; therefore it is up to you, the delegates, to determine the focus of debate. Discussion and resolutions can be centered around whichever aspect your country feels is most pressing: the rights of terrorist detainees, human rights violations on the civilian populous, or both. In the end, delegates must strive to find a balance between human rights and state concerns in their counter-terrorism efforts.
Questions to Consider
- Does there need to be a standard international definition for terrorism? What should
it be?
- What is your country doing to deal with terrorism both within its borders and
internationally?
- What counter-terrorism strategies, if any, does your country utilize
- Has your country been accused of violating human rights when implementing
counter-terrorism?
- How does your country treat terror suspects?
- What is your country’s human rights background?
- What is the proper balance between personal freedom and national security in the
struggle against terrorism?
- How should the United Nations address human right violations committed by
nations in the name of counter terrorism, and how can the U.N. prevent future
abuses while preventing terrorism?
Research Links
- http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/terrorism/index.html
- http://www.hrw.org/en/category/topic/counterterrorism
- http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/Factsheet32EN.pdf
- http://www.un.org/terrorism/instruments.shtml
Guide Taken from http://www.unymun.org/shc.html - Social, Humanitarian, and Cultural
Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism
The September 11th attack on the United States, the 2008 Mumbai shootings and bombings,and the periodic suicide bomber attacks in Iraq are only a taste of the terrorism occurring in the 21st century.
Though the United Nations has not yet agreed-upon a definition for terrorism, it is usually referred to as an act of planned violence, motivated politically or otherwise, performed against civilian targets by non-official groups or agents aimed at influencing public opinion.
No country is immune to terrorism and because terrorism harms people physically and psychologically, it has become a very important social issue that this committee is obligated to address.
In response to the threat of terrorism, states have taken various counter-terrorism measures to ensure the safety of their nation and people.
However, these efforts do not always preserve international human rights standards. As a result, both the general populous and terror suspects are susceptible of having their rights violated.
When employing counterterrorism measures, many States commit basic human rights abuses,including frequent invocation of exceptional powers and limitations that are not always
justified.
Some aspects need special attention such as the respect for private life, deeply affected by the investigation methods that interfere with the privacy and the use of a
person's data by the State; the restriction of freedom of expression and access to information and the State interference on the media; the restriction to the right to own private property and the indefinite detention without charge of foreign nationals suspected of involvement in
terrorism.
Many countries face significant challenges in protecting their citizens against the threat of terrorism and, consequently, disobey the relevant legal framework regarding persons who are suspects of involvement with terrorist acts.
In the fight against terrorism, the rights of terrorist detainees are an issue of great contention.
One of the most relevant consequences of the fight against terrorism is the social claim for short-termed and urgent measures. In this context, States justify their counter terrorism tactics, even if they clearly violate the most fundamental human rights. This is particularly displayed when it comes to the detentions of persons captured or arrested because of suspected involvement with terrorism. In these incidences, the state may fail to respect their
legal framework and relevant procedural safeguards, depriving these detainees of all dignity.
The interrogation process of terrorist detainees is the most common source for a wide range of human rights violations.
Interrogation techniques including hooding, stripping detainees naked, subjecting them to extremes of heat, cold, noise and light, and deprivation of sleep
have been applied to people detained under the charge of terrorism while incarcerated.
These tactics exposes people to pain and humiliation and can eventually results in deaths under questionable circumstances.
The way interrogatories are conducted is fundamental to the "War on Terror". For some governments, this war is to be won with the discovery of information that could help preventing future attacks. For this reason, some States defend that cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment should not be completely prohibited, as in some exceptional circumstances they may be justified and even necessary.
The question herein lies:
Should counterterrorism impose more severe treatment on prisoners incarcerated for
terrorist activities than those incarcerated for civilian crimes? Are these interrogation
techniques valid when the State is obligated to protect their communities from terrorist
violence?
Closely related to the treatment dedicated to detainees is the right of any person to a fair trial.
Although this is an internationally recognized fundamental right, after the intensification of
the fight against terrorism, there has been intention on some parts to compromise this
principle in the name of security. But should fair trial standards be sacrificed to prosecute
terrorism? The right to a fair trial is guaranteed by both the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights and the Geneva Conventions for the Protection of Victims of Armed
Conflict. Other provisions of the Covenant consist of the protection of the defendant's right
to be presumed innocent; right to be informed promptly of the charges; to be tried without undue delay; to be tried in his presence; to defend himself in person or through legal assistance; to communicate with counsel; to examine, or have examined, the witnesses against him; not to be compelled to testify against himself or to confess guilt; and to have any conviction and sentence reviewed by a higher tribunal according to law.
However, many argue that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to terrorism and that when people commit such atrocities against civilian populations, they forfeit such legal rights. Are the abuses on prisons warranted? If not, how can they be avoided and controlled by the international
community and also how does international humanitarian law applies to the fight against
terrorism.
There should be no contradiction between effective counterterrorism measures and protection of human rights. It must be assumed, then, that the dignity of all the people must be protected even in urgent events, especially avoiding injustice to a specific group.
When fighting terrorism, States should pay further attention to the effects of the adopted counter terrorism measures and to the risk of damaging the rule of law.
The scope of this topic is very broad; therefore it is up to you, the delegates, to determine the focus of debate. Discussion and resolutions can be centered around whichever aspect your country feels is most pressing: the rights of terrorist detainees, human rights violations on the civilian populous, or both. In the end, delegates must strive to find a balance between human rights and state concerns in their counter-terrorism efforts.
Questions to Consider
- Does there need to be a standard international definition for terrorism? What should
it be?
- What is your country doing to deal with terrorism both within its borders and
internationally?
- What counter-terrorism strategies, if any, does your country utilize
- Has your country been accused of violating human rights when implementing
counter-terrorism?
- How does your country treat terror suspects?
- What is your country’s human rights background?
- What is the proper balance between personal freedom and national security in the
struggle against terrorism?
- How should the United Nations address human right violations committed by
nations in the name of counter terrorism, and how can the U.N. prevent future
abuses while preventing terrorism?
Research Links
- http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/terrorism/index.html
- http://www.hrw.org/en/category/topic/counterterrorism
- http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/Factsheet32EN.pdf
- http://www.un.org/terrorism/instruments.shtml
Guide Taken from http://www.unymun.org/shc.html - Social, Humanitarian, and Cultural