权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Ethics and Security: Terrorism and Transnational Organized Crime

道德与安全：恐怖主义与跨国有组织犯罪

基本信息

批准号：
ES/K000098/1
负责人：
Thomas Sorell
金额：
$ 44.38万
依托单位：
University of Warwick
依托单位国家：
英国
项目类别：
Fellowship
财政年份：
2013
资助国家：
英国
起止时间：
2013 至无数据
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=ES%2FK000098%2F1
关键词：
Ethics Security Terrorism Transnational Organized

项目摘要

This project introduces ethics research into the Global Uncertainties programme and adds value to on-going security research in the programme. The ethics research juxtaposes terrorism and transnational organized crime. On some understandings, terrorism is just a special kind of transnational organized crime, to be dealt with by established policing techniques within and between jurisdictions. Policing operations, at least in the West, are subject to stringent ethical and legal constraints, especially when directed at citizens of the jurisdiction being policed, and especially where the operations seek to prevent crime rather than to detain and try offenders guilty of an offence already committed. On other understandings, terrorism is a military threat, terrorists are combatants, and countering terrorism is literally a war. In a war, lethal force can legally and morally be used against combatants, and the penetration of military secrets by secret or underhand means is not typically considered immoral, because its target is an enemy rather than people who have the status of citizens. So it makes a great difference whether terrorism is seen as transnational organized crime that requires a policing response, or as a military threat. Even if it is seen as a policing matter, and especially as a preventive policing matter, there is considerable controversy over the means that can be used against it. Counter-terrorism involves mass searches at airports, secret wire-tapping, bugging, camera-surveillance and internet monitoring, questionable kinds of data-sharing, questionable kinds of detention even of people there is evidence against, and, at the extreme end, torture and extra-legal killing. Because of the way counter-terrorism affects a wide cross section of the public, some of the associated preventive policing techniques are more controversial than they would be if employed in a more targetted way against paedophiles, people traffickers; drug dealers; and weapons smugglers. Perhaps there is less scope, in policing non-terrorist, serious crime, for the use with bad consequences of ethnic and other stereotypes; and it may make a difference to that some kinds of transnational serious crime are much more prevalent, and harm many more people more frequently, than terrorism. Some activities associated in UK legislation with terrorism, such as glorifying it, are arguably protected by human rights to free speech and association; propaganda activities by the other side during a war, on the other hand, are routinely subverted by the other side, with no moral overtones. In short, the ethical differences between counter-terrorism and measures against (other kinds of) transnational organized crime are themselves of research interest. Identifying and explaining these differences, and suggesting how they should be reflected in public policy are important research tasks of this project. But the project also has a role in adding value to projects elsewhere in Global Uncertainties. These other projects sometimes aim at detecting patterns of behaviour that indicate possible criminal conspiracy, or even a tendency to violence. They also speed up identification of suspects. All of these kinds of research carry ethical risks, some of which may not be obvious to scientific researchers. The Leadership function of the project will involve interaction with other GU-funded projects for the purpose of identifying such risks and helping researchers to accommodate them, and even to write about them. Another function of the research will be to organize interactions between GU-supported researchers, companies in the UK and European security sector, and ethicists. Such interactions have been pioneered by the PI in previous European research.

该项目将道德操守研究纳入全球安全方案，并为方案中正在进行的安全研究增加价值。道德研究将恐怖主义与跨国有组织犯罪并列。根据某些理解，恐怖主义只是一种特殊的跨国有组织犯罪，应在管辖范围内和管辖范围之间通过既定的警务技术加以处理。至少在西方，警务行动受到严格的道德和法律的限制，特别是当针对被警务管辖区的公民时，特别是当行动旨在预防犯罪而不是拘留和审判已经犯下罪行的罪犯时。根据其他理解，恐怖主义是一种军事威胁，恐怖分子是战斗人员，打击恐怖主义实际上是一场战争。在战争中，可以合法和道德地对战斗人员使用致命武力，通过秘密或不正当手段渗透军事机密通常不被认为是不道德的，因为其目标是敌人而不是具有公民地位的人。因此，恐怖主义是被视为需要警察应对的跨国有组织犯罪，还是被视为军事威胁，这是一个很大的区别。即使它被视为一个警务问题，特别是作为一个预防性警务问题，有相当大的争议，可以用来对付它的手段。反恐涉及大规模搜查机场，秘密窃听，窃听，摄像头监视和互联网监控，可疑的数据共享，可疑的拘留，甚至对人有证据，并在极端的结束，酷刑和法外处决由于反恐影响到广大公众，一些相关的预防性警务技术比更有针对性地打击恋童癖者、人口贩运者、毒品贩子和武器走私者更具争议性。也许，在对非恐怖主义严重犯罪进行治安时，利用族裔和其他陈规定型观念造成不良后果的余地较小;而且，与恐怖主义相比，某些种类的跨国严重犯罪更为普遍，更经常地伤害更多的人，这一点可能会有所不同。联合王国立法中与恐怖主义有关的一些活动，如美化恐怖主义，可以说受到言论自由和结社自由人权的保护;另一方面，战争期间另一方的宣传活动通常会被另一方颠覆，没有任何道德色彩。简言之，反恐与打击（其他种类的）跨国有组织犯罪的措施之间的道德差异本身就具有研究价值。识别和解释这些差异，并提出如何在公共政策中反映这些差异是本项目的重要研究任务。但该项目也有一个作用，增加价值的项目在其他地方的全球不稳定。这些其他项目有时旨在发现表明可能的犯罪阴谋或甚至是暴力倾向的行为模式。他们还加快了对嫌疑人的识别。所有这些类型的研究都带有伦理风险，其中一些可能对科学研究人员来说并不明显。该项目的领导职能将涉及与其他全球大学资助的项目的互动，以确定此类风险，并帮助研究人员适应这些风险，甚至撰写有关风险的文章。研究的另一个功能是组织GU支持的研究人员，英国和欧洲安全部门的公司以及伦理学家之间的互动。PI在以前的欧洲研究中开创了这种相互作用。