Complementary goals

The United Nations has always insisted that States must comply with their obligations under international human rights law when countering terrorism. Yet a frequently asked question is: Can societies protect themselves against terrorists without compromising human rights and individual freedoms?

Most countries have agreed to the UN’s Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, which recognizes that “effective counter-terrorism measures and the promotion of human rights are not conflicting goals, but complementary and mutually reinforcing.” If they wish to preserve their futures as stable societies, many States will have to reaffirm that the goals of eliminating terrorism and safeguarding human rights are not mutually exclusive.

The human rights concerns that States must take seriously to ensure their anti-terrorism measures comply with international law are highlighted in a new OHCHR Fact Sheet: Human Rights, Terrorism and Counter-Terrorism. In light of the complex and multifaceted links between human rights and the fight against terrorism, the Fact Sheet underlines the human rights principles which must always be respected—especially in the context of counter-terrorism efforts.

The 72-page Fact Sheet, which is aimed at State authorities, NGOs, legal practitioners and individuals, recognizes that there can be practical difficulties in protecting human rights while conducting an effective fight against terrorism. But the challenges are not insurmountable. States can effectively meet their obligations under human rights law, the Fact Sheet says, “by using the flexibilities built into the international human rights law framework.”

It adds: “As provided for by international human rights conventions, States may legitimately limit the exercise of certain rights, including the right to freedom of expression, the right to freedom of association and assembly, the right to freedom of movement and the right to respect for one’s private and family life.

“But in order to fully respect their human rights obligations while imposing such limitations, States must respect a number of conditions. In addition to respecting the principles of equality and non-discrimination, the limitations must be prescribed by law, in pursuance of one or more specific legitimate purposes and ‘necessary in a democratic society’.”

However, the Fact Sheet makes clear that there are some rights that cannot be revoked under any circumstances. These include the right to life; freedom from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment; and freedom of thought, conscience and religion.

The Fact Sheet looks at some of the more specific human rights challenges in the context of terrorism. These include “shoot-to-kill” law enforcement policies in response to perceived terror threats; attempts to erode the absolute prohibition against torture; the “rendition”, or transfer of individuals suspected of terrorist activity to countries where they could be tortured; unlawful detention; and racial or ethnic profiling.

In the fight against terrorism, it is in the best interest of States’ not to disregard human rights because doing so will decrease their legitimacy while simultaneously increasing resentment and radicalization. A State that weakens essential freedoms to aid its counter-terrorism efforts is in danger of contributing to violence and insecurity instead.