Ticking time bomb scenario

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The ticking time bomb scenario is a thought experiment that has been used in the debate over whether torture can ever be justified in the War on Terrorism. The German sociologist Niklas Luhmann mooted the ticking bomb scenario in the early 1990s^[1].

The argument, simply stated, is that even nations such as the United States that legally disallow torture can justify its use if they have a suspect in custody whom they feel sure possesses critical knowledge, such as the location of a time bomb that would soon explode and cause great loss of life.

Alan Dershowitz, a prominent American defense attorney, surprised some observers by giving limited support to the idea that torture could be justified. He argued that human nature (see: Stanford prison experiment) can lead to unregulated torture and abuse "off the books." Therefore, it would be better if there were a regulated procedure through which an interrogator could request a "torture warrant," and that requiring a warrant would establish a paper trail of accountability. Torturers, and those who authorize torture, could be held to account for excesses. Dershowitz's suggested torture warrants, similar to search warrants and phone tap warrants, would spell out the limits on the techniques that interrogators may use, and the extent to which they may abridge a suspect's rights.

Critics of torture state that no such scenario has ever occurred and that such a situation is highly unlikely. Every case resembling this thought experiment has been resolved without torture. Furthermore, it is asked whether torture would be limited to suspects, or whether one could torture the family and friends of a suspect to make him compliant. According to John Yoo, this would be legally permissible. Another point is the notorious unreliability of the information gathered, i.e. Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi. The biggest objection is the notion that innocent suspects could be subjected to torture as a result of this "the ends justifies the means" debate.

FBI interrogators decided to withdraw from all participation in the interrogations conducted on detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, because some of the techniques being used would preclude any possibility of the detainees being tried in a US court of law. ^{[citation needed]}