Terrorism and Human Rights

“Human Rights for our societies have to uphold the Rule of Law”, this dictum of Lord How
has true implication in the current society. In our country all state decisions are subject to
pressures and counter pressures, pulls and counter pulls, judicial interventions and so on and
so forth. We are a liberal state so we are always on our toes, but what about terrorists? They
act as self-appointed jurists, judges, prosecutors and executioners. Of late, terrorism has
emerged as one of the most dangerous threats to Human Rights everywhere in the world.
Human Rights are regarded as those fundamental and inalienable rights which are essential
for life as human beings. The endurance of a society is a human right. But this basic human
right to live in peace with security cannot be rejuvenated by any government which faces the
threat of terrorism. Terrorism is a negation of life and violation of norms of human
behaviour. By spreading terror and panic among people it hits the very roots of democracy.
Every civilised state cherishing a democratic way of life is bound to fight terrorism.
Democratic governments while countering terrorism become subject to charges of “excesses”
and “violations of human rights” and are thus “damned if they do and doomed if they don’t”.
This is due to the fact that while the permissible spectrum of terrorism is being narrowed in
international law, the growing international commitment to human rights tends to further
legitimize political violence and terrorism. The role of human rights activists and
organizations becomes relevant to bring out the public opinion for effective controls not only
over the “siege of terror” but also the “reign of terror”.

“Terrorism is unacceptable. Terrorists must never be allowed to create a pretext for their
actions. Whatever the causes they claim to be advancing, whatever grievances they claim to
be responding to, terrorism cannot be justified.”

Though violent behaviour is not new to the society, but terrorism in its present day
incarnation has become a major threat to the global society. Civilised world faces
extraordinary challenges in this anathema of the new millennium called terrorism. What
terrorism attacks is the basic edifices of a modern state, like democracy, state security,
integrity and sovereignty, rule of law and human rights. What exactly is the philosophy
behind terrorism? It can be denoted by just two words “destructive violence”. Terror is
central to the terrorist strategy which leads to the destructive violence that is not merely
designed to accomplish political ends but to play an essential role in a series of intended
events. From legal and religious point of view terrorism can best be defined as “a way of
using or threatening with the use of ‘means which may cause damage to people or property’,
or create state of fear and terror to a person or a group with the intention of achieving
illegitimate goals and objectives”. Terrorists wield political power by placing the victim in a
state of perpetual fear. It is also important to indicate that terrorism is different from an
ordinary crime. The reason is that an ordinary criminal action seeks to achieve personal
interest, however terrorism is committed with the intention of achieving no-personal
objectives which may be social, political or economic and all these objectives are illegitimate.
It has a disproportionate impact on the communities and is corrosive on the very fabric of
society. The very premises of human rights are being shaken due to terrorism. All nations and
people have been affected by the global menace of terrorism which is negating fundamental
human values and assaulting human decency. Terrorism is posing a threat to human rights
and international peace and security, especially when terrorists are armed, financed and
backed directly or indirectly by governments or their agencies.

India too, had its share of terrorist attacks and is facing harsh truths learning to live with it.
Today not only Mumbai and Delhi are high on the terrorist attack list but hi-tech hubs like
Bangalore and Hyderabad have also started beeping on the terrorist radar. If Mumbai was
shocked by the serial blasts in the local trains, delhites were taken aback by bombings in
crowded shopping areas. An overwhelming large number of terrorists are highly educated,
who are college and university drop-outs. Terrorists have become more sophisticated and
know where to attack so that it hurts the most. The Mumbai seven serial blasts orchestrating
in a public transportation system is not the work of an amateur. The terrorists have a fair idea
that India is emerging as an economic superpower and these attacks were in the recent past
mostly targeted on the IT hub Bangalore and other metropolitan cities. We have in the last 20
odd years seen five different kinds of terrorism emerging in India. The most significant one is
the one we see on account of cross border insurgency in the state of Jammu and Kashmir. The
second one was in Punjab which was overcome by operation Blue Star in 1980’s. The third
we saw a severe problem in the south by the LTTE (Liberation of Tigers of Eelam). Problem
in the north east is continuing and the latest addition is the kind of terrorism spread in various
parts of central India, the Maoist insurgency from Andhra Pradesh. The Indian typology has a
distinctive qualitative character. We have a large number of different terrorism: communal,
regional, ideological and ethical of different hues and complexions. In my opinion, the face
of terrorism may be any but it is basically violating the human rights which are primarily
essential for the survival of an individual and existence of society. India’s deep commitment
to human rights is reflected in the formation of the National Commission. India has
responded well to the United Nations Declaration on this score. Hopefully, the United
Nations will continue its endeavour to protect human rights on the one hand, and to curb the
menace of terrorism on the other, thereby translating into action the freedom of the
individual.

Terrorism and Human Rights are poles apart. By no stretch of imagination, can terrorists
claim Human Rights as they themselves snatch Human Rights from their victims all around
the globe. Surely human rights have emerged as an issue of global concern. Terrorism on the
other hand becomes the worst feature of the contemporary world. Terrorist are the biggest
enemy of “law and order”. They fanatically believe in disorder and anarchy with no
conscience. They are the very anti-thesis of an orderly society based on “Rule of Law”.
Although the struggle to preserve, to protect, and to promote Human Rights is as old as
civilization, yet its ugly face manifested more particularly in the aftermath of World War II
(1939-45). The United Nations gave it a shape through the instrumentality of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. The declaration (December 10, 1948) is nothing but a Magna
Carta, enumerating specific standards of achievements in the civil, political, social, economic
and cultural lives of nations of the world. This Declaration marked out a wide area in which
individuals must be protected and indicated that if the government trespassed into that area
they would be giving rise to international concern. Nations between themselves have
zealously guarded each other’s interests through multilateral diplomacy in as much as a new
spirit of corporation in minimising the ill effects of terrorism nationally and internationally.

International attention became focused on terrorism with the attack on World Trade Centre
Twin Towers and Pentagon on September 11, 2001. Since it was the first time such attacks
were experienced by the U.S.A on its surface, it shook up the entire country from the
President downwards. Ever since then the U.S.A has violated the rights of individuals in
Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere in the name of combating terrorism. The Human Rights
violations committed by and on behalf of the U.S.A since September 11, 2001 have been
many and varied. This has been confirmed by documents, photographs, declassified legal
opinions and official statements. The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights
Sergio Vieira de Mello confirmed that the ‘War on Terror’ which has been led by United
States was hurting Human Rights and exacerbating prejudices around the globe. Arabs and
Muslims at large are experiencing increasing incidents of racial discrimination. There is still a
big gap between the level of human rights protection stated in international conventions and
the real condition on the ground. Lack of human rights protection feeds terrorism with more
reasons and justifications to continue and increase.

Impact of Terrorism on Human Rights

Terrorism has an impact on human rights in three ways. First and foremost terrorism denies a
person the very basic human right, the right to life and it creates an environment of fear and
so people cannot live with freedom and enjoy their rights. Secondly, the threat of terrorism
can be used by governments to enact laws which strip away many civil liberties and political
freedoms. Thirdly, without necessarily amending laws or enacting new ones, governments
can use the needs to fight terrorism as an alibi to stifle dissent and criticism and imprison or
threaten domestic opponents. It is evident that there is a clear link between terrorism and
enjoyment of Human Rights and freedoms. This link is seen directly when group of
individuals resort to act of terrorism, and in so doing, kill or injure individuals, deprive them
of their freedom, and destroy their property, or use threat or intimidation to sow fear. This
link can be seen indirectly when a state’s response to terrorism leads to the adoption of
policies and practices that exceed the boundaries of international law and result in Human
Rights violation, such as extra judicial executions, tortures, unfair trials and other acts of
unlawful repression, that violate Human Rights of innocent citizens.

Human Rights and Terrorism: where lies the balance

The question of human rights in the face of countering terrorism is a major issue worldwide.
“The problem becomes more complex in the case of excesses and curtailment of fundamental
rights and liberties of ordinary citizens in counter terrorism action. The evil act of terrorism
and its threats have vitiated the atmosphere and had made the promotion and protection of
human rights more difficult and complex” said by Justice J.S.Verma, former chairperson of
NHRC. The growth in terrorism has been a catalyst in the need to re-consider the question
where the balance should lie between national security and human security? The challenge is
to decide the extent that an interference with rights can be justified in order to combat the
risk. What machinery is there for monitoring? Monitoring and supervision is not the
exclusive province of the Parliaments. National and international judiciaries have a positive
duty to maintain the Rule of Law.

In a significant judgement the Supreme Court has observed that, “The protection and
promotion of Human Rights under the Rule of Law is essential in the prevention of terrorism.
Here comes the role of law and responsibility of the court. If Human Rights are violated in
the process of combating terrorism, it will be self-defeating. Terrorism often thrives where
human rights are violated, which adds to the need to strength action to combat violations of
human rights. The lack of hope for justice provides breeding grounds for terrorism. Terrorism
itself should be understood as an assault on basic rights. In all cases, the fight against
terrorism must be respectful to the human rights. Our Constitution laid down clear limitations
on the state actions within the context of the fight against terrorism. To maintain this delicate
balance, the protection of “core” human rights is the responsibility of the Court in a matter
like this”.

This paper argues that any effort made to counter terrorism should not be in any way
considered as a fair justification for violating human rights or lowering the standards of
human rights protection. Despite great efforts by all countries involved in campaigning
against terrorism it has been obviously seen that terrorism has persisted or even increased. No
real success has been achieved on the ground in relation to countering or eliminating
terrorism. With that failure in international efforts to counter terrorism, the ambiguous
concept of terrorism has not been clarified yet. Those who are considered terrorists by some
are, in fact, deemed national heroes fighting for freedom by others. A question has been
raised as to “why there are good terrorists and bad terrorists?” especially when it is known to
everybody that the actions, strategies, and tactics of all terrorists are the same. This indicates
that there is an urgent need to have a unified definition and criteria in relation to what
constitutes terrorism and when someone shall be considered or called a terrorist. Establishing
unified definition and transparent criteria for terrorism will enhance international acceptance
for any wise policy or effort to counter and eliminate terrorism. Such a definition shall stop
the damage which was caused by the impact of terrorists’ atrocities on human rights in some
domestic jurisdictions, most notably the US and the UK. Such a definition will pave the way
for a firm action by the world community to name a specific court to deal with the offenders
of the crime of terrorism.

Apra Shishoo

B.A.LLB
VI Semester
Amity Law School
Lucknow
Uttar Pradesh