Dirty Harry torture all right, says QC

MELBOURNE - A former chairman of the National Crime Authority says torture is acceptable against terrorists and in some domestic criminal situations.

And Peter Faris, QC, has drawn from the classic Clint Eastwood film Dirty Harry to illustrate why.

Mr Faris joined the debate sparked last week by the head of Deakin University's law school, Mirko Bagaric, and Deakin law lecturer Julie Clarke, who said torture was acceptable in some circumstances.

Mr Faris' comments have been backed by the Crime Victims Association but criticised by human rights groups.

The QC chaired the now-defunct national crime body from 1989-1990, has acted as a senior prosecutor and has represented prominent clients such as alleged underworld figure Carl Williams.

Mr Faris said it would be acceptable to use torture in criminal investigations.

"A psychopathic murderer has buried a teenage girl alive and he is captured by the police," says an example on Mr Faris' blog website.

"He refuses to say where she is. He taunts the police with his knowledge. Torture is acceptable to find the girl and to save her life."

The example was taken from the film Dirty Harry, Mr Faris said.

In the case of terrorism, Mr Faris says: "A militant Islamic group in Iraq is holding a hostage in an unknown location and is threatening to kill the hostage.

"A member of that group is captured, but refuses to disclose the whereabouts of the hostage and the rest of the group. Torture is acceptable."

He said there were no guarantees that torture would work - "if you don't get the information, you don't get the information".

However, "to pull out a fingernail of a terrorist in order to save a couple of million lives" was morally right, he said.

"I'm not saying, 'Let's legislate immediately'," Mr Faris said.

"What I'm trying to establish is that this is a legitimate issue to be on the table for debate ... but people start saying you're a Nazi because you want to debate it."

Mr Faris said legislating for torture was not an ideal situation, and standards of acceptable torture, including "the reasonable application of pain", would have to be set if it were to be used.

Human rights groups including Amnesty International Australia condemned Mr Faris' views.

"Our fundamental position, of course, is that torture can never be justified in any situation," spokeswoman Nicole Bieske said.

"It's morally prohibited and it's also against international laws."

Victorian Foundation for Survivors of Torture director Paris Aristotle said Mr Faris was living in fantasyland if he believed there could be any real-life situation in which torture was guaranteed to be effective.

"When they pull out one of his fingernails and he doesn't say anything, do they find his child and start torturing his child?

"[Then] do they go find his wife and go and rape her in front of him?"

The Crime Victims Support Association said police should be able to torture criminals if they were certain they had information about other crimes.

- AAP