Saturday, April 25, 2009

To prosecute or not to prosecute: that is the question.

A lot is being said and not said about torturous techniques used by the CIA to interrogate enemy prisoners. The far left is outraged and wants Obama to prosecute the people who engaged in those interrogations. There are another set of people who want the interrogators pardoned but their superior officers, who ordered the torture, prosecuted. Obama himself has said he wants to look forward and move on, although he believes this was a crime. The far right neither believes it was a crime nor thinks the agents or their superiors involved in the interrogation should be prosecuted. In short there is a full spectrum of opinions. I hardly expect there to be any consensus on this issue.

There are a few things worth pondering before forming an opinion on this subject though. First of all, if the President thinks torture is illegal and is a crime but in the same breath says that he doesn't support prosecution of the torturers then isn't he condoning a crime? What makes this particular crime forgivable? If this is, then what other crimes are forgivable? The argument that they did what they did to protect the country is hardly defendable. Against what standard or yardstick will you measure an act and say that it is not forgivable regardless what ends it means to achieve? Any odd group of people, together or severally may commit murder, torture, pillage and what not and claim it was necessary, in their best beliefs, to protect the country. By this precedent then they should also not be prosecuted? Or does this mean that only people working in government agencies can be immune from prosecution as long as they claim their actions were for the protection of the country? Who makes this distinction between people in the government and ordinary citizens? The executive branch?

I hope President Obama has well reasoned arguments to answer all of those questions, not just one. There are many angles from which to attack his vacillating decision on whether to prosecute or not to prosecute. I will list at least one such angle in the next blog.

No comments: