Interrogation that aims to collect intelligence from the person being interrogated has received scholarly and public attention, largely as a result of its connection with torture. The torture debate – as it is known – began when interrogators were unable to gain intelligence from ‘four suspect terrorists, among them Zacarias Moussaoui, being held in a New York prison following the September 11 attacks’. Many media organisations then responded to official cues and came out in support of the use of torture for counterterrorism. This debate has intensified discussions about what interrogation practices might be permissible in the pursuit of intelligence. Swathes of publications on torture have followed, many of them of an extremely high quality. Far from all of them, though, are of benefit to the study of interrogation or intelligence. As this chapter will demonstrate, there are sources on interrogation practices that are waiting to be exploited by scholars, and now that interrogation has captured the public imagination, it is likely that the amount of research being conducted will increase.

This chapter will demonstrate the current state of scholarship that addresses, or is relevant to, interrogation for intelligence-gathering. The first of the three main themes is justifiability. The question of what interrogation methods might be justifiable has been approached by legal scholars and moral philosophers. Both put forward arguments as to whether controversial interrogation techniques ought to be used.