(Why) Torture in Afghanistan 2001-2012: Security Threats and the Question of Justifiable

Abstract

The objective of this work is to provide an analysis of the various aspects of torture used by the Afghan government in the post-Taliban era in extracting information from detainees. This thesis argues, based on the case of Afghanistan, that torture cannot be justified, not even for purposes of preventing a larger crime or threat to security. The case of Afghanistan is instructive for this theoretical debate, because for a long time, including the recent ten years since the new government was introduced it has been a case of heightened security concerns, where - if anywhere at all - torture would stand to be justifiable if it could be used to prevent further and larger security threats. Based on primary and secondary sources of information, the research has found the following key points: First, in most cases detainees had been tortured in order to force them to confess and give information to related authorities, for instance, to the National Directorate of Security. Also, the research has found that torture has not been used to prevent terrorist, especially, suicide attacks in Afghanistan. Furthermore, research has found that the second main reason that leads to torture is the lack of capacity of the Afghan interrogators. Meaning that, interrogators do not have sufficient skills to extract information from detainees without having to torture them. Moreover, the research suggests that while several women have been arrested in connection to terrorist attacks they have not been tortured; however, several cases of torture have been documented where the victims have been children. Finally, the research has the practice of torture is generally confined to pre-trial detention centers, but there is virtually absent in the prisons of Afghanistan.