#its because of torture as a means of evidence vs confession laws

[fumblingmusings]

Scotland, despite having a quarter of the population of England, had three times the number of Witch Trials and four times the average within Europe in the 17th century is like. Ah. My dudes. Mayhaps chill?

Like Arthur getting over the worst hump of it following the end of the Commonwealth and a near military theocracratic regime only to turn one way and his brother immediately files 600 cases to Scottish Courts like oh geez but then he to turns around another way to find Alfred has gone off his rocker in Connecticut and Massachusetts and it's like just stop ✋️ for five seconds please.

[scripttorture]

When creating torturer characters, does political party matter? They probably aren’t going to be discussing politics, but I’m curious about if you have any advice on how to handle that. Either how someone’s political party might encourage them or force them to think about torture differently. I realize this is broad. I hope it can be answered in some way.

Ithink that’s an interesting question and one that could definitelyuse further research.

I’mputting this answer together based on a sort of broad historicaloverview of cases where governments dominated by a particularpolitical party definitely had people tortured. This isn’t based onany statistical analysis or published papers. It’s me trying to puttogether an overall impression from the dozens of cases thissituation applies to.

Myinstinct is that political party doesmatter but not in the way you might think.

Isee a strong tendency in political discussions about torture to...tryand turn torture apologia into a left vs right issue. That is notbacked up by evidence.

Leftwing and right wing governments have both tortured and both supportedtorture.

Letme be clear that I am not talking about the ‘extreme’ ends here.I am not talking about dictators and invaders or people who believein torture as a matter of ‘principal’. I am talking aboutgovernments that are democratic and relatively moderate (or were fortheir time).

Aparty being left wing or right wing does not predict, in any way, itsattitude to torture. Or itsuse of it.

What’smore, so far as I can tell, left wing and right wing tortureapologists generally use the samearguments to justify torture.

Howeverpeople on the left and right seem to use different arguments whenopposingtorture.This is a general observation rather than a statistical analysis. Amore thorough analysis may refute this. But my general impression isthat right wing anti-torture activists are more likely to usereligious arguments and left wing anti-torture activists are morelikely to stress international law or the human rights act.

Ifeel like it’s important right now to stress that there have beenanti-torture activists on both sides of the political spectrum who’vemade important contributions to the global community.

Wedisagree over a lot of important things but treating torture as anissue on one political ‘side’ doesn’t help. Because eradicatingit (like eradicating slavery) will take concerted, cross-partypolitical will and effort.

Ithink that covers some of the assumptions that aren’t backed up byevidence but it doesn’t really back up my statement that party canstill matter.

Politicalparties can and do support policies that are likely to encouragetorture. Party members also sometimes use torture apologia as a wayof trying to garner support.

I’llgive some examples and talk about what I mean there but I think it’salso important to stress that ordinary individuals (and politicians)can sometimes respond to these tactics without being aware of whatthey’re encouraging. Not everyone is going to make a mental leapfrom ‘much longer detention time without charges’ to ‘possibilityof police torture being covered up’.

Somepeople willsupport apologist arguments and policies because, on some level, theysupport torture. But it’s perfectly possible to be ignorant of thelarger picture.

Someof the policies that encourage abuse are more obvious than others.

Puttinga lot of legal weight on confessions, allowing people to be detainedwithout access to legal assistance, detaining people for long periodswithout charge, overt differences in the law between differentcategories of people. (Not a complete list).

Butsome policies are more subtle. Eroding oversight for instance.Relaxing laws that protect workers. Encouraging police to prioritisecertain kinds of crime.

Idon’t think it’s necessarily about policies giving governmentgroups ‘too much power’. It’s power without oversight, withoutresponsibility, without consequences. Thatmore then anything else seems to be what encourages torture.

Ifeel like a couple of examples might be helpful.

SoJapan has an incredibly, scarily high conviction rate. Many of theseconvictions are based on confessions.

Likemany countries Japan tends to give lower sentences when peopleconfess. This is not particularly unusual.

However,suspects in Japan can be detained, without charge, for up to 23 dayswhile an investigation is still taking place. They can also bedetained repeatedly.This means that, with no evidence, someone can spend months indetention in Japan. So long as they’re briefly released andre-arrested after 23 days.

Thiscombination of features means there’s little to encourage police toactually investigate a crime. Torture and coercion end up beingencouraged by this kind of environment, whether that is the intentbehind the system or not.

Asanother example of how legal structures can result in abusivesituations let’s take a look at Singapore’s labour laws fordomestic service. (I’m picking this rather than Saudi, where I grewup, because Singapore is actually a less extreme example for thiskind of abusive structure).

Jobcontracts for maids in Singapore do not require them to be given daysoff. Technically there is the option for them to get 1-4 days off amonth but this is optional. There are no standard rights to overtimepay or limits on working hours. Until recently there was no minimumwage.

Toits credit Singapore has made a lot of progress tackling physicalabuse of maids. But they’ve done little to tackle the underlyinglegal structures that allow that abuse.

Neitherof these examples are recent changes to the law, they’reillustrations of an abusive status quo. A lot of people in both thesecountries support the system simply because it’s the way thingshave always been. Political parties might argue in favour of keepingthese systems by portraying changes to the detention system asundermining the police force or by portraying maids as doing the sameamount of work as everyone else yet asking for ‘extra’privileges.

Peoplewho support these policies don’t necessarily see themselves assupporting torture. They don’t necessarily mention torture orabuse. They may find the implication that they’re supporting abusehighly offensive.

Ithink that leaves the kind of rhetoric politicians can use toencourage and condone torture.

Someof this is rather obvious. The kind of broadcasts made in Rwanda inthe lead up to the genocide are not subtle about encouraging andcondoning violence.

Andsome of it, unfortunately, has broader appeal. For instance in thewake of some horrific, well publicised cases of rape and sexual abusein India some politicians said they believed men accused of rapeshould be tortured.

Inthe wake of well publicised crimes or a terrorist attack it’s notunusual for politicians to try and garner support by advocating a‘tougher’ stance on crime. Now obviously not allof these  suggestions support torture, either overtly or subtly. ButI’ve observed that when these conversations are happening on alarge scale across the political spectrum there is usually someonemaking the case ‘for’ torture.

Politiciansalso sometimes-

Inflametensions in a way that can lead to both attacks and torture incustody. This can be by dehumanising certain groups but it’s notalways so direct.

Oneof the examples that’s currently coming to mind is the uh- lobby tobuild a Hindu temple on the site of a historical mosque that wasdemolished. There was a mosque on the site for a considerable lengthof time and both Muslims and Hindus claim the site as sacred. Quite afew Indian politicians have taken sides in an attempt to gain votesfrom these religious communities. And the way some of them have goneabout this has certainly added to tensions between the communities.

Moreregularly politicians downplay the effects of torture or argueagainst the validity of particularly cases before they’ve gonethrough the courts. My impression is that this works in much the sameway as it does for accusations of sexual abuse.

Thelast thing I feel like I should mention is individual politicians’attitudes to the rule of law and things like the human rights act. Myobservation of politics in the UK since arriving has been thatpoliticians who routinely and regularly state opposition to humanrights are more likely to vote for policies which support torture. Isuspect the same holds true for individuals who feel that the lawshould only apply to certain kinds of people, or should only apply incertain circumstances.

Thatisn’t the same as saying the law is unjust or should be changed.Instead it’s the idea that the law should be selectivelyand unfairlyapplied that’s suspect.

PersonallyI believe that these factors seem to be more predictive of supportfor torture then broad political party. Though there have certainlybeen cases where political parties have selectively promoted peoplewho support torture and sideline or get rid of anti-tortureactivists.

Politicalparties and individual politicians influence our view of torture in anumber of different ways. Some are certainly intentional. Others arenot necessarily intentional.

Unlessyou’re writing a politically extreme group that is mostly made upof clear torture apologists- I’d caution against suggesting thattorture apologia is the sole realm of one particular party. Tortureapologists can be found in most political groups. As can people whoare firmly against torture. The proportions can change quite a bit.Parties can become worse or better through the concerted action (orsometimes inaction) of their members.

EssentiallyI would advise focusing on what politicians say and do over theirbroad political ‘side’ when you’re talking about torture.

Ihope that helps. :)

Availableon Wordpress.

Disclaimer