Scholars and activists unite against torture

Richard Carver writes:

We spend a lot of our time at CENDEP thinking about the relationship between academic scholarship and practice. We are academic researchers and the centre is dedicated to development and emergency practice. What that means for us as scholars is inevitably a matter for endless debate – and one for which there can be no definitive answer.  Very early in the history of this blog, Cathrine Brun offered an interesting approach to the collaboration of architects and social scientists, while Charles Parrack has made several contributions on the collaboration between practitioners and scholars in the shelter sector.

The Torture Prohibition Network meets in London

The approach Lisa Handley and I took in our book on torture prevention was distinct from any of these. Our research was indeed commissioned by a practitioner organization (the Association for the Prevention of Torture). Many such collaborations are aimed at helping practitioners to do the things that they do more effectively. Our research question, by contrast, was to ask whether practitioners are doing the right things – not how they could do potentially wrong things better. In fact, we found that one of the four main strands of torture prevention work was ineffective. We were delighted recently with a very positive review of our book by Olivier Chow in the International Review of the Red Cross, not least because it understood precisely what our intention was:

This book is important because it is the first evidence-based feedback on the many efforts of national and international actors in the field of torture prevention. The findings of the research can provide concrete and actionable material for those who work in the field of torture prevention, enabling them to focus on and invest in what works rather than only going along with a formatted response – which sadly is often the norm.

However, this is not the only model of the relationship of scholarship and practice, even within the narrow field of torture prevention. In November, I was invited to take part in and address the founding meeting of the UK Network on the Prohibition of Torture, held at London University. This meeting gathered participants from three distinct sectors: academia, civil society activists, and statutory bodies with responsibility for protection against torture. The focus is on combatting torture and other ill-treatment both within the United Kingdom and internationally. There were two distinct strands present within the meeting: prevention of torture, which was the subject of my remarks, and the rights of victims of torture, introduced by Carla Ferstman, the director of REDRESS.

The meeting was held under Chatham House rules, which means that I cannot report and attribute remarks made in the meeting. I strongly recommend reading this excellent summary of the proceedings. What was interesting to me was the many potential modes of collaboration between academics and activists. To give one example: in my presentation I referred to one of the conclusions from our book, namely the very poor quality of available data on torture and ill-treatment. We recommended that reporting be standardized in order that data be comparable across both time and space. Of course, what we primarily had in mind was less developed countries where all recording of official data is underreported. It was surprising to be told by representatives of UK statutory bodies that they faced precisely these problems – and appealed to scholars for help in compiling better statistics. Here is a simple area for collaboration – at least in principle. We share a common interest in accurate, consistently recorded data, whether to aid our research or to enable us to fulfil our protective role. This was one of a number of potential common interests that the meeting identified.

Anyone interested in participating in the network can either contact the Global Governance Institute at UCL, following the embedded links above, comment on this article, or email me: rcarver@brookes.ac.uk. There is some more information on our research here.