2. The majority of torture victims, even in countries beset by widespread civil conflict, have no security information about violent opposition groups to give away. They are tortured either to force confessions from them or as an acute message not to oppose the government. Even it torture could be shown to be efficient in some cases, it could simply never be permissible. From the point of view of the individual, torture, for whatever purpose, is a calculated assault on human dignity and for that reason alone is to be condemned absolutely. From the point of view of society, once justified and allowed for the narrower purpose of combating political violence, torture will almost inevitably be used for a wider range of purposes against an increasing proportion of the population. Just using torture once, almost invariably leads to its institutionalization and will erode the moral and legal principles that stand against a form of violence that could affect all of society. For the state, torture subverts a basic tenet of just punishment, a prescribed penalty for a proven offence. It destroys any amount of trust between citizens and rulers.
2. Governments are faced with a choice among priorities. If they are confronted with a vociferous opposition or with an armed insurgency the paramount priority would seem to be the stifling of that opposition and the crushing of the insurgency. Under such circumstances torture is easily used for the dual purpose of obtaining information and instilling terror. Torture becomes a political tool for the realization of the paramount priority, even though some other branch of a government may endorse the campaign against that practice.