Human Rights, Counter-Terrorism And The Morality Of Extra-Judicial Killing: The Philosophy And National Interest Perspective

Within the second half of the twentieth century, the spate of terrorist attacks all over the world adopted such stride that warranted reaction of international community in form of several treaties and Conventions on counter-terrorism. Under these treaties, States have rights and duties to take counter-terrorism measures to prevent and deter terrorist attacks and to prosecute those responsible for carrying out such heinous acts. The significance of this paper is stressed by the additional duty to comply with State obligation under international law, particularly, international human rights, refugee and humanitarian laws. The purpose of this paper amongst others, is to draw attention to the awkward development arising from the fact that, in pursuit of these measures, various member states have adopted all kinds of counter-terrorism measures, ranging from targeted killing, extra-judicial killing and running of torture camps and chambers, especially in the aftermath of the 9/11 attack on the United States of America; which sad event orchestrated permissive regime of rechristening every conceivable opposition as terrorism that must be addressed, by all forms of high-handedness. This dimension of counter-terrorism measures raise several human right questions, bordering on human right and humanitarian law on the one hand, and the question of morality of extra-judicial killing on the other. By doctrinal or theoretical approach, the paper observed and found that there is a gap in the International Law on counter terrorism, on the approach an aggrieved State may adopt where a terrorist is either evasive of the cause of justice or where the State hosting him is either unable or unwilling to bring him to justice. The paper lamented over too much emphasis on the human right of individual terrorist at the expense of peace and stability of the State. The paper thus recommended that counter-terrorism laws be amended to reflect this obvious gap and counseled that national policies on counter-terrorism should put security of other Nations into consideration for a more balanced administration of international justice.