Pillar III—building states' capacity to counter terrorism
There is no doubt that the link between counterterrorism and sustainable development underscored the significance ot not focusing on counterterrorism alone at the detriment of alleviating poverty, unemployment, corruption and other social ills of the society at large. The primary responsibility' ot implementing the Global Counterterrorism strategy lies on the member states’ capability' to customise the directives received from the both UN and non-UN entities in consideration when they design their system, which ot course will reflect on their customs, cultures, ways ot life and their day-to-day activities (Ward, 2003). The member states will claim ownership when they' become part of the process and strive for preserving its existence rather than a straightjacket approach or one-size-fits-all approach. Compliance, accountability', continuity of training and structured follow-up were among other challenges that threaten the foundation of Pillar III. One way' of going around this stumbling block is by' looking at it as a two-way street—participants and donors alike must work together to ensure their complementarity and reinforcement—as the old saying goes, it takes two to tangle (Bianchi, 2014). To avoid the issue of redundancy, comprehensive mapping of the division of labour will virtually eliminate overlapping functions capacity building both in CTED and CTITF initiatives. The way' things are now, there is a disconnect between GA and SC in their mandates as evidenced in the lack of comprehensive architectural structure that spelt out completely the diflerent ownerships ot programs and initiatives. To overcome the challenges of lack of compliance oversight and accountability, some experts suggested, “regional peer mechanisms could be even more useful in generating both uniform compliance and long-term sustainability” (Stanley Foundation, 2007:34).
Pillar IV—ensuring respect for human rights and advancing the rule of law
Some ot the challenges facing the implementation of the UN Global Counterterrorism Operations in Africa stem from the problem of how to strike a balance between human rights protection for the victims ot terrorism and insurgency versus protecting the rights of perpetrators of terrorism and insurgency within the due process of the law. The participants of the 42nd Conference on the United Nations ot the Next Decade listed some rights that must be protected by the rule of law and summed it up thus:
- • Right to Life. Protection from the controversial use ot overwhelming military strikes against suspects, shoot-to-kill policies, and expansion ot death penalties is necessary to ensure that counterterrorism actions are seen as legitimate and do not lead to more radicalisation.
- • Right to Nondiscrimination. Protection from growing animosity against ostracised groups, both globally (regarding Muslims) and locally (tor minority ethnic, religious, or cultural groups who may house some violent elements at the domestic level) is necessary to avoid indiscriminate policies.
- • Right of Free Speech. Freedom of public expression against government actions (e.g., via the Internet and media) needs to be protected.
- • Right to property. The United Nations and national governments should not freeze assets without due process.
- • Right to a Fair Trial and protection from arbitrary detention without charge. Adjudicated courts should be used to vet suspects.
- • Right to be Free of Torture and other ill-treatment. Freedom from abuse or torture to obtain intelligence is necessary, not only to protect the human rights of suspects but also to increase the effectiveness of counterterrorism efforts. Forced confessions may not always lead to better enforcement, and proper police procedures improve the reliability of intelligence obtained.
- • Right ot Return. Protection against torture or discrimination when refugees attempt to return to their homeland is a matter not only ot refugee protection and the UNHCR mandate but will also strengthen counterterrorism efforts (Stanley Foundation, 2007:36).
When the Security Council via Resolution 1373 created CTC, there were several criticisms levied. The UN Charter forbids it from making international law, criminalising terrorism, and playing the role of a global legislator, which boils down to an infringement on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) adopted by the UN General Assembly at the 3rd session on 10 December 1948. In response to these criticisms, the Security Council passed Resolutions 1456 (2003) and 1624 (2005) calling on the Member States to “ensure that any measure is taken to combat terrorism comply ... with international law, in particular international human rights, refugee, and humanitarian law” (UNHRC, 2005).