Ethics of Rendition Essay

This theatre begins by stating that nulla poena sinfulness lege, nitty-gritty that no mortal whitethorn be punished except in consonance with the police force. In each instance, on that point must be a police force governing and prescribing punishment. Further to that non omne quod licet d decl ar accountabilityum est, meaning that non every occasion that is permissible or even lawful is honest or honorable. There atomic number 18 limitations in keep an eye on of this maxim. Fin tout ensembley, it would as well as like to state that apices juris non sunt jura or non congruit de apicibus juris disputargon, meaning that licit principles must non be carried to their or so extreme consequences, regardless of equity and good sense.This debate deems it fit to address the issue of rendering inside the three maxims mentioned at that place above. It is worth while to business line that rendition is not only a legal issue but as well as an honourable issue, so to speak. Therefore this take will rent into experimental condition several good theories to enrich the theoretical post of this study. The section on findings and discussion will will a critical synthesis between law and morality discussed in this study. This will also be the part where this study will give its own stance regarding moral philosophy of rendition.Research Questions Q. To what extent mess rendition be justified? Q. Is it justifiable in law and in morality? Literature round off This section will explore in prudence the notion of rendition and its impact on modern society. It will look at how different presidencys note ab manage on it especi all(prenominal)y in the get together States. translation is defined as the act of shifting a mortal from one nation to an separate for shackles and examen through the use of pain, which would not be permissible if they remained in a certain countrified. uncommon rendition involves the transportation of suspected fo s way of life dreadists or other persons suspected of hatreds, to other countries for dubiousness and imprisonment. feeling at the above definition one groundwork already dismiss the rationale of rendition off-hand. just out front even getting to the aspect of squeeze in it, why would a regimen take advantage of another countrys laws? why is it hard for such a government to enact laws friendly to rendition in their own country? There be so m all other queries that wish to be addressed here.It is hoped that the aim of iniquitous rendition is to make suspects provide intelligence discipline by torturing them. These suspects are all send to facilities sponsored by the US government or flush toilet be left in the hands of foreign governments. As mentioned earlier, suspects are transported to countries whose laws do not destroy twirl and abusive sermon. In this regard, superior rendition allows acts of torture towards detained suspects notwithstanding the position that torture is an crime, at least, under international law no battleground the cost.This radiation diagram is believed to guard begun back in nineties but gained its momentum following the September 9/11 attacks on US. It is also believed that this policy re-appeared during the reign of Bill Clinton although it grew in strength during the reign of George Bush. It is estimated that cl foreign nationals welcome been dupes of torture as a result of rendition in the last hardly a(prenominal) years alone. In most cases this foreign nationals have purportedly been suspected for terrorist acts.After their transportation, detention and interrogation takes come forward in countries like Jordan, Egypt, Diego Garcia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Egypt and Guantanamo. Robert Baer, the former CIA agent, is on degrade for having said that if one wants a skillful interrogation then the culprit should be send to Jordan. If the aim is to torture them then the surmount place would be Syria and if the ai m is to make a victim disappear and never to be seen again, then the best place would be Egypt. There are allegations that US intelligence agencies have sent terror suspects for interrogation by security officials in different countries.By so doing, they put them in a smear where they cannot be protected by the American Law. roughly persons confess that they were flown to countries like Syria and Egypt by CIA agencies where they were tormented. The US government and its intelligence agencies believe that their operations are de jure justified. Even though US officials agree that terror suspects have been transported to other countries for interrogation, they vehemently deny that acts of torture take place when they get there.The former US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is on record for having said that all American interrogators act inside the UN Convention on deformation. She went further to state that they cling to this Convention while exercising their duties in US or in another country. There are several documents that detail human rights legislation, for instance (a)Third and quaternary geneva Conventions (b) common Declaration of Human Rights (UNDHR) (c) unify Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT) and (d) US opus. Surprising equal is that US government is a signatory of each(prenominal) of these treatises.This study believes that by the fact that united States identifies with the principles in each of these documents it should be the first nation to rampart victims against acts of torture. Nonetheless, the impression is that US promotes tremendous rendition in the name of war on terror. Then why would one not accuse US government of hypocrisy or cynical relativism in legal injury of its commitment to human rights and civil rights laws? Moreover, the fact that US are a signatory to the abovementioned documents it needs to brush off programs that violate human self-worth.The Third and Fourth geneva Conventions The Geneva Convent ion set the standards for international law as far as humanitarian issues are concerned. Its central concern was the treatment of civilians as easily as prisoners of war. Its principles safeguard against human rights violations and establish universally acceptable standards and onward motiones relating to detained victims in times of war. The Convention forbids every form of physical or mental torture or any other kind of compulsion towards suspects in a bid to gather data from them.It further states that even if the prisoners overlook to open up during the interrogation process they should not be fright or abused or mal tough for that egress. The ordinary Declaration of Human Rights The fifth term in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that no person shall be put to torturous acts or inhumane treatment or punishment. Apart from providing an order against torture it further restricts the utilization of degrading treatment or punishment.In the sixth article, i t states that every person has a right to recognition before the law no matter where the person is or could be. The eighth article invalidates the CIAs usage of extraordinary rendition. This article states as follows Everyone has the right to an trenchant remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the original rights granted him by the temperament or by law. This study believes that whenever prisoners are transported to other countries chances that this protocol will be observed are instead minimal.The ninth article proscribes the arrest of persons with no right-hand(a) justification, including detention or exile. This provision prevents United States from carrying out extraordinary rendition activities. The tenth article essentially invokes what in Latin can be termed as habeas dealer which literally nub that one may have the body. It is a writ ordering a person to be brought before a homage or judge so that the court may ascertain whether his detent ion is lawful or not. United Nations Convention against TortureThis convention has an international field on human rights protection. This Convention is greatly endorsed by the United Nations and its observance is extremely mandatory for all the member states who are signatory to it. As mentioned earlier, United States is a signatory of this document so it has no option but to adhere to its provisions. This Convention states that all signatories should create impound measures to safeguard against torturous acts indoors their territories and prohibits countries from transferring persons to other countries so that they might torture them. member two states that every state ought to exercise appropriate legislative measures, administration and judicial measures to fight any elements of torture under its jurisdiction. It further states that under no slew can torture be justified. The circumstances could be a state of war or a threat of war or existence emergency. It also does not m atter whether such orders come from the top officers, torture remains unjustified. In article three it states that no person may be transported to another state to be interrogated or tortured simply because that countrys laws allow it.The Constitution of the United States It is quite impressive to discover that the practice of extraordinary rendition is not only prohibited as seen in the three Conventions discussed above, but the US constitution is against it as well. The Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Eighth Amendments are a clear indication that US holds a no-policy towards extraordinary rendition. These amendments prohibit arbitrary search and raptus of individual and/or property it also invokes the right to due process of law, as in, the concept of habeas corpus mentioned above.In this light, US government contradicts the spirit of its constitution whenever they indulge in extraordinary rendition. Deontology versus Utilitarianism Deontological moral scheme is also a Non-Consequentia list moral theory. While consequentialists believe that the end everlastingly justify the manner, deontologists assert that the excellence of an military action is not simply qualified by maximizing the good alone, it must be that the action fulfils what is considered moral. It is the inherent nature of the act alone that determines its ethical standing.Or better still, utilinitarianism believe that one should always exploit the good in his/her actions while deontologism believes that it is not the pursuit of the good but it is the moral goodness in the act. Virtue Ethics is not a great deal concerned with rules, consequences and specific acts but it puts more fierceness on the subject of the actions. In other words, it is elicit with the person who is responsible for acting. It holds that acting in accordance with given(p) rules or analyzing the good outcome of the actions is not what should only count.The most primary thing is whether the subject of the actions, in this c ase the individual, exhibits elements of good character or moral virtues or not. Unlike utilitarianism which is concerned with the maximization of the good in performing a given act, virtue ethics instead, straines on the moral pure tone exhibited by the agent of the actions. Therefore, the dictum that the end justifies the means has no place in virtue ethics. On the other hand, deontologism is somehow a normative approach to ethics which typically evaluates the actions of an individual in apprisal to moral standards in the objective order.Both utilitarianism and deontology focus on the actions of the agent contrary to virtue ethics which is a complete turn to the subject that is acting. Findings and interchange Throughout this study it can be seen that there is no where that extraordinary rendition has been justified. The reader pickings part in this study can all the way ascertain that rendition has no place either in law or in morality. Furthermore, it cannot be justified n o matter the circumstance. This study stock-still believes that persons who destabilize peace and stability should be dealt with accordingly.In any way, they should be eliminated in the society. Looking at the intention of extraordinary rendition, it stands justified in that it serves as a deterrent kind of punishment. Literally, it makes the culprits pay for the wrongs they have committed. In the coetaneous society crime cannot be something that anybody will brush under the carpet, it is important that preventative measures be put in place. The Conventions discussed in this study clear indicate that extraordinary rendition is an offence in law.Now, the problem is that this study does not encounter to what extent each of these Conventions applies. It was stated very clearly that signatories to these Conventions are bound by them so do these same Conventions apply to countries like Syria, Jordan or Egypt which are clearly the preferred destinations for acts of interrogation and torture. This study cannot fail to mention that most countries, or instance, Syria or Egypt are sovereign and with authentic constitutions. Could it be that their constitutions allow extraordinary renditions?Or is it that their laws do not care just about such practices? This means that a country need not legalize torture but the fact that its laws say nothing about acts of rendition it becomes a reason to practice them. From a utilitarian ethical viewpoint, the end qualifies the means so long as the acts brings desirable end. This means that utilitarianism supports extraordinary rendition so far as it will eliminate same crime occurring in the future. On the contrary, deontological ethical viewpoint believes that what should be investigated is the act itself not the consequences.As such, torture is profligate whether a nation recognizes it in law or not. This study confidently declares torture an immoral thing and something that should not be used as a form of punishment. Finall y, this study would like to reiterate that the contemporary world needs to enact stiff measures to secure that all criminals have been completely wiped out. No person should disturb another persons peace. It also believes that due process of law is the best way to deal with criminals. Imprisonment in itself is maximum punishment since it denies such criminals opportunities for further commitment of crime.Conclusion This study has explored the meaning of extraordinary rendition and its implications. So far, there is no where in this study has it been justified. Much of its practice has been adopted by the United States government in its war on terror. From the Conventions it is clear that the practice of torturous acts remains entirely prohibited no matter the cost. It has also been indicated that the major proponents of extraordinary rendition, the United States for this matter, prohibit such practice in their constitution.This study has also highlighted two ethical standpoints nam ely deontologism and utilitarianism. Inasmuch as utilitarianism justifies the means due to the perceived good it does not tour any justification for extraordinary rendition. So, human dignity should be upheld at all times. This study invites persons with vixenish intentions to reconsider their attitudes and evade practices that would make them be treated inhumanly. Bibliography Alfred W. McCoy, (2006). A Question of Torture CIA Interrogation from the cutting War to the War on Terror (New York, metropolitan Books) p. 60.Craig R. Ducat, (2000). Constitutional Interpretation Rights of the Individual, Vol. II (Belmont, Wadswoth/Thomson Learning), E33. 18 garret T. (2005). Virtue Theory. London International Committee of the red Cross, International Humanitarian Law Third 1949 Geneva Convention. http//www. icrc. org/ihl. nsf/FULL/375? OpenDocument Jeremy Brecher et al. (2005). eds. , In the Name of Democracy American War Crimes in Iraq and Beyond, (New York, Metropolitan Books) p. 3 04-5. Korsgaard, Christine M. (2003). Punishment & truth Extraordinary Rendition. New York Cambridge UniversityNoam Chomsky, (1999). The Umbrella of U. S. Power The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Contradictions of U. S. Policy (New York, Seven Stories Press) p. 71. stain of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading interposition or Punishment, http//www2. ohchr. org/english/law/cat. htm Schumpeter J. (2006). The Understanding of Deontology moralistic Theory. Oxford University Press Stephen Grey, (2007). Ghost Plane The True horizontal surface of the CIA Rendition and Torture Program. New York.