The justice of torture. Some remarks

Abstract

The “Pandora Box” on the issue of justifying torture, which has been considered sealed since the international legal consensus was reached in the post-Second World War period, has been recently reopened by quite few philosophers and legal scholars. This work analyses the philosophy of torture, its consequentialist variants, as well as some of the argumentative strategies used to make room for legitimacy in our modern democracies. It begins by reviewing two of the most relevant works against the torture, written in the 18th Century, aiming at emphasizing its phenomenological incompatibility with the law. The reopening of the “Pandora Box” took place afterward Israel Landau Commission conclusions in 1989. After reminding us of Jeremy Bentham's position in this regard, the author insightfully criticizes other strategies developed in order to legitimize it today. His conclusion, however, is emphatic: torture, if it is a deliberate imposition of suffering against an individual, continues to be torture, whatever its motive or ends may be, and cannot be justified.