A Note on Psychoanalysis and the Crime of Torture

Abstract

All questioning is a forcible intrusion. When used as an instrument of power it is like a knife cutting into the flesh of the victim. The questioner knows what there is to find, but he wants to touch it and bring it to light. He sets to work on the internal organs with the sureness of a surgeon. But he is a special kind of surgeon, one who keeps his victim alive in order to find out more about him, and, instead of anaesthetizing, deliberately stimulates pain in certain organs in order to fmd out what he wants to know about the rest of the body.'-Elias Canetti 1 'Torture is senseless violence, born in fear. The purpose of torture is not only the extortion of confessions, of betrayal: the victim must disgrace himself, by his screams and his submissions, like a human animal.'-Jean-Paul Sartre 2

When Torture Mocks the Law: Understanding Police Brutality in South Africa

“…It is especially during police raids that torture is inflicted upon people who are suspected of being in possession of illegal firearms or drugs or on those who are suspected of having knowledge of other suspects and of withholding important evidence. It is thus unsurprising that torture functions "...as an information-gathering device" (Clemens and Grigg 2006) and that it prevails as a perceived efficacious modus operandi to extract information. Recent studies have argued that there is a correlation between torture and the truth (Hajjar 2000;Parry 2003;Schiemann 2012).…”

“…Although it is hardly credible that torture is embraced as a justification for information gathering, this justification is reinforced by the perception that the information obtained "will possibly save humanity from inhumanity" (Grossman 2009). As justified as this argument may sound, this reasoning shifts the focus of torture as a crime against humanity to torture being considered a necessary act of crime on behalf of humanity, and unfortunately this rationale increases the risk that torture will become a ritualised practice (Clemens and Grigg 2006) that encourages a policing style in which a suspect or offender is treated as the enemy without any evidence (Hill and Berger 2009). This may endanger human rights in a democratic society, especially if the police construe the information withheld by a suspect to be more imperative than the law, the life of the suspect, and human dignity.…”

“…Lowth (2017) agrees, arguing that fear, stress, and pain 'break' a suspect into delivering useful information. This suggests that those that can resist torture may become compliant and produce false information to escape more pain whereas, according to Clemens and Grigg (2006), those strong enough to hold out against torture may be acquitted for lack of evidence even though they are guilty. Law enforcement officials rely on their authority to justify their violent acts of torture and render individuals powerless.…”

“…A disconcerting finding is that torture may result in death rather than a confession in some instances. Clemens and Grigg (2006) argue that "evidence produced by torture is irredeemably unreliable and in itself unjust". There is therefore no doubt that torture produces results that remain obscure.…”