Counterterrorism’s Secret Weapon: Human Rights
Terrorism is a threat that needs no introduction. The horrific images of September 11th 2001 and countless other attacks have left an everlasting impression on the minds of ordinary citizens and driven heads-of-state to expend tremendous resources, even wage war, to thwart future plots. There is of course little debate as to the deadly repercussions of a successful terrorist act, but markedly less discussion surrounds the risk of governments, whether wittingly or not, infringing on the basic human rights of their citizens in the otherwise noble aim of strengthening national security.
While the OSCE Mission to Bosnia and Herzegovina naturally understands the colossal task of mitigating the threat of terrorism, security in the long-term is unachievable without vigilant respect of human rights, a principle to which the Mission stands wholly committed, and one that forms a central part of its approach to counterterrorism. To this end, the Mission recently organized a conference in concert with the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) and the BiH Ministry of Security that focused on this very subject.
“Countering Terrorism, Protecting Human Rights” provided a forum in which representatives from BiH’s law-enforcement and security sectors could deepen their understanding of the fundamental challenges to human rights that arise in counterterrorism policy, and develop practical applications of international and European human rights standards in their daily work. The event came on the heels of a number of scandals over the years in which governments have been accused of, among other practices, torture and extralegal rendition while apprehending, interrogating, or detaining suspected offenders, says Marina Narvaez, an adviser on anti-terrorism issues for ODIHR and co-leader of the conference. “States have the tendency to pit the ideas of human rights and counterterrorism against each other, considering that human rights must give way to the imperatives of security”, Narvaez notes.
Fortunately, law enforcement authorities and counterterrorism specialists worldwide have made important inroads in the preservation of human rights while countering terror. As early as 2001, OSCE member states voted into existence the Bucharest Plan of Action for Combating Terrorism, a counterterrorism blueprint that not only reduces the threat of terrorism, but also enshrines the protection of human rights as one of its mandates. Furthermore, the net of human rights was cast ever greater when in 2006 the United Nations adopted the United Nations Global Counterterrorism Strategy, which devotes an entire article to the “fundamental” importance of protecting human rights while fighting terror.
In practice, however, numerous governments have struggled to implement effective and accountable measures against the erosion of human rights in counterterrorism. India, for example, is a country that habitually confronts the threat of terror and has joined numerous other countries in being subject to criticism for questionable counterterrorism practices. However, as the world’s largest democracy and current chair of the United Nations Security Council's counterterrorism committee, the country has made notable improvements. According to a Human Rights Watch report, “investigations into attacks attributed to the Indian Mujahideen in 2010 did not draw…widespread allegations of mistreatment” and Indian investigators used “evidence, rather than hunches” to pursue those responsible for attacks that ravaged the country in 2006-07.
Key to making sure that these improvements continue worldwide is translating sometimes convoluted regulations into everyday applications for ordinary citizens or local police officers who may not be experts in counterterrorism. “Article 2 and Article 3 are very nice but what does that mean for the neighborhood policeman driving in a car on a Saturday night?” asks Jean-Pierre Devos, a decade-long veteran of the Belgian Federal Police with significant experience in counterterrorism issues. In Devos’ assessment, making these standards more universally accessible is central to effective counterterrorism, rejecting the idea that counterterrorism is a preserve for the experts.
Counterterrorism stakeholders from first responders to federal prosecutors strive to respect human rights not merely because it is a nicety of international law, but is also in and of itself an effective, if essential, weapon in the fight against global terrorism. Conference attendee and inspector with the Zenica-Doboj Canton’s Ministry of Interior Munever Mehičić has himself come across many terrorism-related cases in which charges were dropped or sources discredited because evidence was obtained in ways that ran counter to European and international laws that protect human rights.
No one faults governments for wishing to protect their citizens. But long-term security is only assured in countries where national security is equated with the dignity of individual citizens. “If we become so enthusiastic in our fight against terrorism that we forsake standards and mechanisms that protect our freedoms and rights,” asserts Brigadier General (retired) Victor von Wilcken, the OSCE Mission to BiH’s Director of Security Cooperation, “then we have not strengthened ourselves at all against terrorism; on the contrary, we have become weaker as a result of it because we have weakened the foundations of our country’s democracy.”