“Finally, taking on board unproven allegations, there is a significant amount of circumstantial evidence to suggest that the use of torture by the US and some of its allies in the war on terror is both widespread and systematic. Taking the three cases described above as examples, the geographical distance between them, the involvement of many different agencies, and the similarity of the processes and techniques used point towards a coordinated strategy of information-gathering based on torture. “
“However, in its unclassified form it does not specify precisely what measures were authorized. This is especially problematic because there is evidence to suggest that successive Attorneys-General supported a permissive definition of the law in relation to interrogation (see below), and the Defense Secretary specifically identified fear as a legitimate interrogation tool. Third, the report limited itself to proven cases of abuse and did not investigate as yet unproven allegations. In the absence of external monitoring, however, accusations of torture are notoriously difficult to prove, owing to the lack of witnesses, the use of techniques (such as near-drowning and beating the soles of the feet) designed not to leave lasting damage, and the lapse of time between acts of torture being committed and the victim being in a position to complain about them safely”
“I argue that the prohibition on torture should be maintained but that in exceptional circumstances desperate necessity may dictate, though not excuse, its use. There are at least three reasons for maintaining the prohibition. First, the torturer’s claim that ‘torture always works’ is no more realistic than the liberal claim that ‘torture does not work’. Although there are cases where torture has led to the extraction of useful information, there are many other cases where it has not. The utilitarian argument is therefore not strong enough by itself to override the fundamental rights argument. Second, torture violates the jus in bello principle of non-combatant immunity: a right that can never be suspended, even during emergencies. Third, torture cannot be defended in a morally consistent fashion: claiming a moral right to torture prisoners to extract militarily necessary information creates a precedent that others may use.”