CASE: The United Nations Committee against torture recently condemned Israel’s methods of

questioning terrorism suspects, which often involve, among other things, forcefully shaking detainees, the
use of painful restraints, and sleep deprivation. Defenders of Israel’s methods counter that over the past
four years more than 200 Israelis have been killed by terrorists. They also contend that in the last two
years, Israel’s secret service, the Shin Bet, has prevented ninety planned terrorist attacks, often through
the use of what the Shin Bet terms, “moderate physical pressure” in questioning suspects. Furthermore,
the defenders of Israel’s methods note that Israel lives in what Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
calls, “a very tough neighborhood,” in which its adversaries often go much further than Israel in applying
force to detainees.

QUESTION: Is the use of physical force when questioning individuals suspected of terrorist activity
justified under the kinds of conditions that currently exist in Israel? If so, why? If not, why not?

GUIDELINE/Reminder: Employ/apply at least Three (3) “working principles” that we have discussed
during the term. Explain thoroughly applying the principles you noted.

Names: Atienza, Mark; Dizon, Hazel; Sta. Ana, Mary Section: DGE02
Date: February 27, 2018

Your Answer/s Here:

When determining the morality of an act, it is important to look at the action done in all aspects
before condoning or condemning it since morality does not only regard an action to be a good
act or a bad act; it scrutinizes the goodness of a good act and the badness of a bad act. Given
the case in Israel, if we are to consider the act of the Israelites itself in which they use “moderate
physical pressure” in questioning suspects of terrorism, it is, then, most likely that we categorize
their action as an act that is morally wrong as its very nature is to inflict severe pain onto
someone and force that person to do or say something that is against their will. However, if we
are to also consider the purpose of the Israelites’ methods and the circumstances of living in
Israel wherein the lives of many are threatened by numerous terrorist attacks, we, then might
consider the Israelites’ methods are one that is vindicated for, it is after all, for the safety and
security of most of the Israelites.

Then again, the second principle for judging morality states that an act that is intrinsically evil is
not morally allowable regardless of purpose or circumstances. Thus, the Israelites’ use of
“moderate to physical pressure” in questioning suspects of terrorism cannot be disregarded as
simply a method of maintain public safety and security. Ultimately, it is morally wrong for Israel’s
secret service, Shin Bet, to use of physical force when questioning individuals suspected of
terrorist activity for the following reasons.

Firstly, those that have been put under “moderate physical pressure” are only suspects of
terrorist activities and are yet to be proven guilty. It is just right that they be not deprived of life
and liberty without due process of law. Until proven guilty, suspects are not to be penalized for
whatever they are accused of. Secondly, the fundamental rights of those proven to have done
crimes are to be respected nevertheless because, in the plainest sense, they still bear dignity as
human beings, and lastly, Christian morality teaches that the degradation of other human beings
is seen as an affront to God and God’s creation. Human dignity is inherent within each of us and
to maim or destroy that dignity is a grave sin. Denigrating fellow humans rupture humanity and
destroys the basic spiritual principle of the Golden Rule, which commands that we treat others
as we would want to be treated ourselves.
Thus, the Israelites’ methods of questioning terrorism suspects are not morally allowable despite
of their aims to lessen the risks of terrorist attacks given their circumstances in a “tough”
environment. The decision of the United Nations Committee Against Torture to raise the issue in
Israel is only fair as such methods have violated basic moral principles.