Battling Brutal Regimes

IF YOU'VE BEEN THINKING lately about the civil rights implications of recent Supreme Court decisions, such as the approval of tax-supported nativity scenes or the continuation of federal funds to sexually discriminatory schools, here's a brutal reminder of what some people have to think about all the time:

They hit me with a but: after placing a stick behind my knees, and making me get down on my knees, they stepped on my thighs. They said. "Even a well-trained spy from North Korea will confess when we do this "When the stick was broken they brought another to continue.

Amnesty International (AI)'s newly released book, Torture in the Eighties, does not demean the constant American struggle over civil rights interpretation. But it does provide a healthy measure of perspective for American citizens--as a chilling, factual account of brutal practices little known in the industrial West. And while the action of such groups as Al, the United Nations, and other international organizations brings many cases of torture to light, the book still leaves one with "an underlying sense of pessimism about the prevention of such acts as the South Korean incident excerpted above.

Half of the book is devoted to a general discussion of torture, and half to a country-by-country breakdown of the cases investigated by Al. Perhaps the most immediately shocking fact is a statistic, more than 90 countries in the world routinely practice torture, according to the study. These include some of the largest industrial notions: China, the Soviet Union, Brazil and India, to name but a few. Every continent save North America experiences torture: even our strongest ally, Britain, is knows to have used extensive police brutality in war-torn Northern Ireland.

Al defines torture quite broadly as "an aggravated and deliberate form of cruel inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment," although this definition has been, challenged by various regimes, including the United Kingdom in reference to the accusations in Northern Ireland. However, even under this broad definition. Al takes a commendably strong stand against all forms of officially sanctioned brutality. Nor does the study exclude psychological or mental brutality from those practices it condemns. For this reason, Al censures the Soviet Union for its treatment of psychiatric prisoners, who are often political prisoners interned for "anti-social" acts. The use of drugs and isolation techniques in these Soviet hospitals has long been known and the study rightly deplore it.

The study is persuasive, largely because it is politically neutral. Equal criticism goes to brutal regimes of the left and the right; for example, both North and South Korea are cited for extensive use of torture. Also, Israeli treatment of West Bank Palestinians receives harsh condemnation.

The study does not attempt to interpret the justifications of individual regimes; instead. Al asserts "that the classical apology for torture (that the authorities are obliged to defeat terrorists or insurgents) does not fit the facts. [It] ignores the fact that the majority of torture victims...have no security information."

MUCH OF THE BOOK is devoted to a listing of the organizations and procedures which provide recourse to relatives and friends of suspected torture victims. These include the International Red Cross, various UN agencies, the Organization of American States and other regional bodies, and Al itself The authors also list the various charters and declarations under which torture is outlawed. All of which should make the study a valuable resource for any individuals or groups concerned about stopping torture in their own country or rescuing a friend or relative from a brutal regime.

Nevertheless, the book cannot avoid leaving the reader with a vague, uncomfortable impression of sadness, pessimism, and frustration. Significantly, only two nations--Brazil and the UK in Northern Ireland--are cited for significant improvement during the past three years, and both have relatively high standards of living. And if any common denominator can be found in the most offensive regimes, it is poverty and poor living conditions. The study alludes to this basic problem.

The fact that torture or other ill-treatment occurs in dozens of countries while it is prohibited by the laws or constitutions of at least 112 countries shows that a simple legislative prohibition is not sufficient to ban torture Where the political will exists, however, a government can stop torture.

If a government itself can act so blatantly in contradiction to its own laws, the implication must be that international legislation will be even less effective. Therefore, the primary goal of commendable organizations such as AI must be to provide information; the harsh realities of torture must be graphically illustrated to inspire any action. The response must then come from the centers of power, particularly those of the West.