Extraordinary rendition by the United States

Extraordinary rendition and irregular rendition are terms used to describe the apprehension and extrajudicial transfer of a person from one state to another.^[1] "Torture by proxy" is used by some critics to describe situations in which the United States has transferred suspected terrorists to countries known to practice torture.^[2][3][4]

It is alleged that the CIA runs a secret global abduction and internment operation of suspected terrorists, known as “extraordinary rendition”, which since 2001 has captured about 3,000 people and transported them around the world. It has been alleged that torture has been employed with the knowledge or acquiescence of the Governments of the United States and the United Kingdom. Condoleezza Rice, then United States Secretary of State, said in an April 2006 radio interview that the United States does not transfer people to places where it is known they will be tortured.^[1][5][6]

The US program prompted several official investigations in Europe into alleged secret detentions and unlawful inter-state transfers involving Council of Europe member states. June 2006 report from the Council of Europe estimated 100 people had been kidnapped by the United States' Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) on EU territory (with the cooperation of Council of Europe members), and rendered to other countries, often after having transited through secret detention centers ("black sites") used by the CIA, some sited in Europe. According to the separate European Parliament report of February 2007, the CIA has conducted 1,245 flights, many of them to destinations where suspects could face torture, in violation of article 3 of the United Nations Convention Against Torture.^[7] A large majority of the European Union Parliament endorsed the report's conclusion that many member states tolerated illegal actions of the CIA and criticized several European governments and intelligence agencies for their unwillingness to cooperate with the investigation. Within days of his inauguration, President Obama signed an Executive Order opposing rendition torture and establishing a task force to provide recommendations about processes to prevent rendition torture.^[8]

Definitions

Rendition, in law, is a transfer of persons from one jurisdiction to another, and the act of handing over, both after legal proceedings and according to law. Extraordinary rendition, however, is a rendition which is extralegal, i.e. outside the law. As rendition refers to the transfer, the apprehension, detention, interrogation, and any other practices occurring before and after the movement and exchange of extrajudicial prisoners do not fall into the strict definition of extraordinary rendition. In practice, however, the term is widely used to describe such practices, particularly the initial apprehension. This latter usage extends to the alleged transfer of suspected terrorists by the US to countries known to torture prisoners or to employ harsh interrogation techniques that may rise to the level of torture.^[1]

The Bush administration has freely admitted this practice; stating, among other provisions that they have specifically asked that torture not be used. Torture can still occur, however, despite these provisions, and much documentation exists alleging that it has happened in many cases.^{[9][10][11][12]} In these instances, the initial captor allows the possibility of torture by releasing the prisoner into the custody of states that practice torture.

The next distinction of degree is that of intent, where much of the search for evidence continues. It has been further alleged that some of those detainees have been tortured with the knowledge, acquiescence or even participation of US agencies. A transfer of anyone to anywhere for the purpose of torture would be a violation of US law.^[1] However, New York attorney Marc D. Falkoff says that such evidence that transfer for the purposes of torture was an operational practice does exist. In a court filing Falkoff describes a classified prisoner transfer memo from Guantanamo as noting that information could not be retrieved, as torture could not be used, and recommending that the prisoner be sent to a nation that practiced torture.^[13]

Historical instances

A law existed in ancient Athens giving relations of an Athenian who had been murdered in a foreign state which had refused punishment or extradition of the murderer, the right to seize the foreigner and bring him before the Athenian courts. ^[14] Accordingly the principle of international abduction as a last resort, in the absence of other remedies, has ancient precedents.

However, the US has used rendition increasingly since the 1980s as a tool in the US-led "war on terror" to deal with foreign defendants, ignoring the normal extradition processes in international law.^[15] Modern methods of rendition include a form where suspects are taken into US custody but delivered to a third-party state, often without ever being on US soil, and without involving the rendering countries termed "extraordinary rendition". The CIA was granted permission to use rendition (to the USA of indicted terrorists) in a presidential directive signed by US President Bill Clinton in 1995, following a procedure^[16] established by US President George H. W. Bush in January 1993^[17].

Critics have accused the CIA of rendering suspects to other countries in order to avoid US laws mandating due process and prohibiting torture, even though many of those countries have, like the US, signed or ratified the United Nations Convention Against Torture.^[18] Critics have also called this practice "torture flights".^[19] Defenders of the practice argue that culturally-informed and native-language interrogations are more successful in gaining information from suspects.^[20][21]

In a number of cases, suspects to whom the procedure is believed to have been applied later were found to be innocent.^[22] In the cases of Khalid El-Masri and Maher Arar, the practice of extraordinary rendition appears to have been applied to innocent civilians, and the CIA has reportedly launched an investigation into such cases (which it refers to as "erroneous rendition").

The first well-known rendition case involved the Achille Lauro hijackers in 1985: while in international air space they were forced by United States Navy fighter planes to land at the Naval Air Station Sigonella, an Italian military base in Sicily used by the US navy and NATO, in an attempt to place them within judicial reach of United States government representatives for transport to and trial in the United States.^[23]

20th century

In September 1987, during the Reagan administration, the United States executed an extraordinary rendition, codenamed Goldenrod, in a joint FBI-CIA operation. Fawaz Yunis, who was wanted in the U.S. courts for his role in the hijacking of a Jordanian airliner that had American citizens onboard, was lured onto a boat off the coast of Cyprus and taken to international waters, where he was arrested.

"The Reagan administration did not undertake this kidnapping lightly. Then-FBI Director William Webster had opposed an earlier bid to snatch Yunis, arguing that the United States should not adopt the tactics of Israel, which had abducted Adolf Eichmann on a residential street in Buenos Aires, Argentina, in 1960... In 1984 and 1986, during a wave of terrorist attacks, Congress passed laws making air piracy and attacks on Americans abroad federal crimes. Ronald Reagan added teeth to these laws by signing a secret covert-action directive in 1986 that authorized the CIA to kidnap, anywhere abroad, foreigners wanted for terrorism. A new word entered the dictionary of U.S. foreign relations: rendition."^[24]

The American Civil Liberties Union alleges that extraordinary rendition was developed during the Clinton administration by CIA officials in the mid-1990s who were trying to track down and dismantle militant Islamic organizations in the Middle East, particularly Al Qaeda.^[25]

According to Clinton administration official Richard Clarke:

Both the Reagan and Clinton cases involved apprehending known terrorists abroad, by covert means if necessary. The policy later expanded.

In a New Yorker interview with CIA veteran Michael Scheuer, an author of the rendition program under the Clinton administration, writer Jane Mayer noted, "In 1995, American agents proposed the rendition program to Egypt, making clear that it had the resources to track, capture, and transport terrorist suspects globally — including access to a small fleet of aircraft. Egypt embraced the idea... 'What was clever was that some of the senior people in Al Qaeda were Egyptian,' Scheuer said. 'It served American purposes to get these people arrested, and Egyptian purposes to get these people back, where they could be interrogated.' Technically, U.S. law requires the CIA to seek 'assurances' from foreign governments that rendered suspects won’t be tortured. Scheuer told me that this was done, but he was 'not sure' if any documents confirming the arrangement were signed."^[27] However, Scheuer testified before Congress that no such assurances were received.^[28] He further acknowledged that treatment of prisoners may not have been "up to U.S. standards." However, he stated,

This is a matter of no concern as the Rendition Program’s goal was to protect America, and the rendered fighters delivered to Middle Eastern governments are now either dead or in places from which they cannot harm America. Mission accomplished, as the saying goes.^[29]

Thereafter, with the approval of President Clinton and a presidential directive (PDD 39), the CIA instead elected to send suspects to Egypt, where they were turned over to the Egyptian Mukhabarat.

21st century

Following the September 11, 2001 attacks the United States, in particular the CIA, has been accused of rendering hundreds of people suspected by the government of being terrorists — or of aiding and abetting terrorist organizations — to third-party states such as Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Morocco, and Uzbekistan. Such "ghost detainees" are kept outside judicial oversight, often without ever entering US territory, and may or may not ultimately be devolved to the custody of the United States.^[27][30]

According to a December 4, 2005 article in the Washington Post by Dana Priest:

Following mounting scrutiny in Europe, including investigations held by Swiss senator Dick Marty who released a public report in June 2006, the US Senate, in December 2005, was about to approve a measure that would include amendments requiring the director of national intelligence to provide regular, detailed updates about secret detention facilities maintained by the United States overseas, and to account for the treatment and condition of each prisoner.^[33]

Reported methodology

Media reports describe suspects as being arrested, blindfolded, shackled, and sedated, or otherwise kidnapped, and transported by private jet or other means to the destination country.^[34] The reports also say that the rendering countries have provided interrogators with lists of questions.

Airline flights

In October 4, 2001, a secret arrangement is made in Brussels, by all members of NATO. Lord George Robertson, British defense secretary and later NATO’s secretary-general, will later explain NATO members agree to provide “blanket overflight clearances for the United States and other allies’ aircraft for military flights related to operations against terrorism.”^[35]

Boeing Jeppesen international trip planning

On October 23, 2006, the New Yorker reported that Jeppesen, a subsidiary of Boeing, handled the logistical planning for the CIA's extraordinary rendition flights. The allegation is based on information from an ex-employee who quoted Bob Overby, managing director of the company as saying "We do all of the extraordinary rendition flights—you know, the torture flights. Let’s face it, some of these flights end up that way. It certainly pays well." The article went on to suggest that this may make Jeppesen a potential defendant in a law suit by Khaled El-Masri.^[36] Jeppesen was named as a defendant in a lawsuit filed by the ACLU on May 30, 2007, on behalf of several other individuals who were allegedly subject to extraordinary rendition.

"Black sites"

In 2005, the Washington Post and Human Rights Watch (HRW) published revelations concerning CIA flights and "black sites," covert prisons that are operated by the CIA and whose existence is denied by the US government. The European Parliament published a report in February 2007 concerning the use of such secret detention centers and extraordinary rendition (See below). Such detention centers violate the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the UN Convention Against Torture, treaties that all EU member states are bound to follow.^[37][38][39]

According to ABC News two such facilities, in countries mentioned by Human Rights Watch, have been closed following the recent publicity. CIA officers say the captives were relocated to the North African desert. All but one of these 11 high-value al Qaeda prisoners were subjected to the harshest interrogation techniques in the CIA's secret arsenal, sometimes referred to as "enhanced interrogation techniques" authorized for use by about 14 CIA officers.^[40]

Extraordinary renditions and black sites in Europe

So-called "rendition" illegal flights of the CIA, as reported by Rzeczpospolita^[41]

In January 2005, Swiss senator Dick Marty, representative at the Council of Europe in charge of the European investigations, concluded that 100 people had been kidnapped by the CIA in Europe — thus qualifying as ghost detainees — and then rendered to a country where they may have been tortured. Marty qualified the sequestration of Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr (aka "Abu Omar") in Milan in February 2003 as a "perfect example of extraordinary rendition."^[42][43][44] (See below: The European investigation and its June 2006 report)

The Guardian reported on December 5, 2005, that the British government is "guilty of breaking international law if it knowingly allowed secret CIA "rendition" flights of terror suspects to land at UK airports, according to a report by American legal scholars."^[45][46]

Criticisms of the Washington Post's decision to withhold locations of the black sites

A comment by FAIR^[47] on the Washington Post's decision, to withhold the locations of these secret prisons, was that since the revelations "could open the U.S. government to legal challenges, particularly in foreign courts, and increase the risk of political condemnation at home and abroad," the Post did its part to minimize these risks. Yet, according to FAIR, "the possibility that illegal, unpopular government actions might be disrupted is not a consequence to be feared, however — it's the whole point of the U.S. First Amendment." Furthermore, by not disclosing these locations it would make it impossible to have them closed and thereby the Post is enabling the rendition, secret detention, and torture of prisoners at these locations to continue. Another consequence might be that U.S. soldiers and civilians are put at risk.^[48]

According to Raw Story, the Polish site identified by reporter Larisa Alexandrovna and Polish intelligence officer David Dastych is Stare Kiejkuty.

"The complex at Stare Kiejkuty, a Soviet-era compound once used by German intelligence in World War II, is best known as having been the only Russian intelligence training school to operate outside the Soviet Union. Its prominence in the Soviet era suggests that it may have been the facility first identified — but never named — when the Washington Post’s Dana Priest revealed the existence of the CIA’s secret prison network in November 2005."^[49]

Both Alexandrovna and Dastych have stated that their sources told them that the same information and documents were provided to Washington Post in 2005. In addition, they also identified the methodology of concealing the black sites:

"Former European and US intelligence officials indicate that the secret prisons across the European Union, first identified by the Washington Post, are likely not permanent locations, making them difficult to identify and locate. What some believe was a network of secret prisons was most probably a series of facilities used temporarily by the United States when needed, officials say. Interim “black sites” – secret facilities used for covert activities — can be as small as a room in a government building, which only becomes a black site when a prisoner is brought in for short-term detainment and interrogation."

They go on to explain that "Such a site, sources say, would have to be near an airport." The airport in question is the Szczytno-Szymany International Airport, according to Alexandrovna and Dastych.

In response to these allegations, former Polish intelligence chief, Zbigniew Siemiatkowski, embarked on a media blitz and claimed that the allegations made by Alexandrovna and Dastych were "...part of the domestic political battle in the US over who is to succeed current Republican President George W Bush," according to the German news agency Deutsche Presse Agentur."^[50]

Prison ships

The United States has also been accused of operating "floating prisons" to house and transport those arrested in its war on terror, according to human rights lawyers, who claim there has been an attempt to conceal the numbers and whereabouts of detainees.^[51]

Example cases

Khaled Masri case

Abu Omar case

On February 17, 2003, Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr (aka "Abu Omar") was kidnapped by the CIA in Milan (Italy),^[52] and deported to Egypt. His case has been qualified by Swiss senator Dick Marty to be a "perfect example of extraordinary rendition".^[42]

On February 17, 2003, CIA agents allegedly kidnapped Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr, also known as Abu Omar, as he walked to his mosque in Milan for noon prayers.^[53] From there, he was flown by a Lear jet (using the call sign SPAR 92) to Ramstein, Germany. SPAR (Special Air Resources) is the call sign used by US senior military officers and civilian VIPs for airlift transport^[54][55] A second plane then took him to Cairo, where he was imprisoned and, he claims, tortured.^[10] At the time of his disappearance, Italian police were investigating allegations that Nasr had tried to recruit jihadists. Prosecutor Amarando Spataro, known for his aggressive investigations of leading Mafia figures, said the abduction was illegal because it violated Italian sovereignty, while also disrupting an ongoing police investigation.

On December 6, 2005, the Washington Post reported Italian court documents which showed that the CIA tried to mislead Italian anti-terrorism police who were looking for the cleric at the time. Robert Seldon Lady, the CIA's substation chief in Milan, has been implicated in the abduction. In a written opinion upholding the arrest warrant, judge Enrico Manzi wrote that the evidence taken from Lady's home "removes any doubt about his participation in the preparatory phase of the abduction."^[56] Robert S. Lady however, alleged that the evidence has been gathered illegally, and has denied involvement in the abduction.^[57] Photos of Robert (Bob) Lady and other defendants recently have surfaced on the Web.^[58]

In June 2005, Italian judge Guido Salvini issued a warrant for the arrest of 13 persons said to be agents or operatives of the CIA. In December 2005, an Italian court issued a European arrest warrant against 22 CIA agents suspected of this kidnapping (including Robert Seldon Lady, Eliana Castaldo, Lt. Col. Joseph L. Romano, III, etc.^[59]). The CIA hasn't commented on the case, while Berlusconi's government has denied any knowledge of a kidnapping plot.^[60] Just after the 2006 Italian general elections, Roberto Castelli (Lega Nord), outgoing Justice Minister, declared to Italian prosecutors that he had not passed the extradition request to the US.

Furthermore, Marco Mancini, the SISMI director of anti-terrorism and counterespionage, and Gustavo Pignero, the department's director in 2003, have been arrested, on charges of complicity in a kidnapping with the aggravating circumstances of abuse of power. There are now 26 EU arrest warrants for U.S. citizens in connection to this event.^[61] A judge also issued arrest warrants for four Americans, three CIA agents and an Air Force officer who commanded the security forces at Aviano Air Base at the time of the abduction.^[62]

On February 12, 2007, Mr Nasr's lawyer said he had been released and was back with his family.^[63]

On November 4, 2009, an Italian judge convicted 22 suspected or known CIA agents, a U.S. Air Force (USAF) colonel and two Italian secret agents of the kidnap, delivering the first legal convictions in the world against people involved in the CIA's extraordinary renditions program.

Majid Mahmud Abdu Ahmad case

A story in the Los Angeles Times on December 8, 2005 seems to corroborate the claims of "torture by proxy." It mentions the attorneys for Majid Mahmud Abdu Ahmad, a detainee held by the Pentagon at Guantanamo Bay, filed a petition to prevent his being transferred to foreign countries. According to the petition's description of a redacted classified Defense Department memo from March 17, 2004, its contents say "officials suggested sending Ahmad to an unspecified foreign country that employed torture in order to increase chances of extracting information from him."

Mr Falkoff, representing Ahmad, continued: "There is only one meaning that can be gleaned from this short passage," the petition says. "The government believes that Mr. Ahmad has information that it wants but that it cannot extract without torturing him." The petition goes on to say that because torture is not allowed at Guantanamo, "the recommendation is that Mr. Ahmad should be sent to another country where he can be interrogated under torture."^[64] In a report, regarding the allegations of CIA flights, on December 13, 2005, by the rapporteur and Chair of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe's Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, Swiss councillor Dick Marty, it was concluded: "The elements we have gathered so far tend to reinforce the credibility of the allegations concerning the transport and temporary detention of detainees — outside all judicial procedure - in European countries."^[65] In a press conference in January 2006, he stated "he was personally convinced the US had undertaken illegal activities in Europe in transporting and detaining prisoners."^[66]

Muhammad Bashmila case

Muhammad Bashmila, a former secret prisoner, now free in Yemen, gave an interview to the BBC Newsnight programme, where he spoke of being transferred from Afghanistan to a detention center where it was cold, where the food appeared European and where evening prayers were held. Somewhere in Eastern Europe is suspected.^[67]

Maher Arar case

Maher Arar, a Syrian-born dual Syrian and Canadian citizen, was detained at Kennedy International Airport on 26 September 2002, by US Immigration and Naturalization Service officials. He was heading home to Canada after a family holiday in Tunisia. After almost two weeks, enduring hours of interrogation chained, he was sent, shackled and bound, in a private jet to Jordan and then Syria, instead of being extradited to Canada. There, he was interrogated and tortured by Syrian intelligence. Maher Arar was eventually released a year later. He told the BBC that he was repeatedly tortured during 10 months' detention in Syria — often whipped on the palms of his hands with metal cables. Syrian intelligence officers forced him to sign a confession linking him to Al Qaeda. He was finally released following intervention by the Canadian government. The Canadian government lodged an official complaint with the US government protesting Arar's deportation. On September 18, 2006, a Canadian public enquiry presented its findings entirely clearing Arar of any terrorist activities.^[68] In 2004 Arar filed a lawsuit in a federal court in New York against senior U.S. officials, on charges that whoever sent him to Syria knew he would be tortured by intelligence agents.^[69] US Attorney General John Ashcroft, Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge and FBI Director Robert Mueller are all named in the lawsuit.^[70] On October 18, 2006, Arar received the Letelier-Moffitt Human Rights Award from the Institute for Policy Studies for his ordeal. On October 18, 2007, Maher Arar received apologies from the U.S. House of Representatives. Nevertheless, U.S. Representative Dana Rohrabacher, who also apologized, stated that he would fight any efforts to end the practice.^[71]

Other cases

This is a non-exhaustive list of some known examples of extraordinary rendition.

• A Pakistani newspaper reported that in the early hours of October 23, 2001 a Yemeni citizen, Jamil Qasim Saeed Mohammed, a 27-year-old microbiology student at Karachi University, was spirited aboard a private plane at Karachi's airport by Pakistani security officers.^[72]
• In October 2001, Mamdouh Habib, who lives in Australia and has both Australian and Egyptian nationality (having been born in Egypt), was detained in Pakistan, where he was interrogated for three weeks, and then flown to Egypt in a private plane. From Egypt, he was later flown to a US airbase in Afghanistan. He told the BBC that he did not know who had held him, but had seen Americans, Australians, Pakistanis, and Egyptians among his captors. He also said that he had been beaten, given electric shocks, deprived of sleep, blindfolded for eight months and brainwashed.^[69] After signing confessions of involvement with al-Qaeda, which he has now retracted, Mr Habib was transferred to Guantanamo Bay. He was released without charge in January 2005.^[73] Former Pakistani Interior Minister Makhdoom Syed Faisal Sawleh Hayat told in an interview by the Australian current affairs programme Dateline that Mr Habib was linked with the "terrorist element" operating at that time. However, he contradicted himself a few minutes later, in the same interview, saying that Habib had been assumed guilty because he was in the restricted province of Baluchistan without proper visa documents.^[74]
• In 2002, captured Al Qaeda leader Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi was rendered to Egypt where he was allegedly tortured. The information he provided to his interrogators formed a fundamental part of the Bush administration case for attacking Iraq, alleging links between Al Qaeda and Iraq. Al-Libi later recanted his story and it is generally believed that his stories of contact between the Saddam Hussein regime and Al-Qaeda were fabricated to please his interrogators.^[75]
• Ahmed Agiza and Muhammad al-Zery, two Egyptians who had been seeking asylum in Sweden, were arrested by Swedish police in December 2001. They were taken to Bromma airport in Stockholm, had their clothes cut from their bodies, suppositories inserted in their anuses and in diapers, overall, handcuffs and chains put on an executive jet with American registration N379P with a crew of masked men. They were flown to Egypt, where they were imprisoned, beaten, and tortured according to reports by Swedish investigative pogramme "Kalla fakta"^[76] The Swedish ambassador visited them only six weeks later. Agiza was previously charged and sentenced in absentia with being an Islamic militant and was sentenced to 25 years, a sentence that was reduced to 15 years due to the political pressure after the Rendition became known. Al-Zery wasn't charged, and after two years in jail withouth ever seeing a judge or prosecutor he was sent to his village in Egypt. In 2008 AL Zery was awarded 500 000 dollars in damages by the Swedish government for the wrongful treatment he received in Sweden and the subsequent torture in Egypt.
• In March 2002, Abou Elkassim Britel, an Italian citizen with Moroccan origins, was arrested in Pakistan and subsequently interrogated by Pakistani and US officials. He was then rendered to Moroccan authorities, detained and torture in a secret detention center in Temara. He was finally released without any charges brought against him, before being rearrested in May 2003 at the border crossing of the Spanish enclave of Melilla in North Africa. He is currently imprisoned in Äin Bourja prison in Casablanca after having been sentenced to nine years in January 2004 for membership of a subversive organisation and for activities including the holding unauthorised meetings. This in spite of conclusions in September 2006 by Italian Justice, after a five years investigation, that there was "an absolute lack of grounds of evidence of charge which may be used in trial" and that the suspicion motivating the inquiries had proved unfounded. Nonetheless, allegations in the Italian press and the judicial proceedings that were underway in Italy influenced court proceedings against Britel in Morocco that led to him being sentenced. MPs from Italy and from the European Parliament are set to ask the Moroccan Royal Cabinet to grant a pardon to the Italian citizen^[77] According to the European Parliament Temporary Committee on the Alleged Use of European Countries by the CIA for the Transport and the Illegal Detention of Prisoners headed by rapporteur Giovanni Claudio Fava, documents demonstrated that "the Italian judicial authorities and the Italian Ministry for Home Affairs (the latter, acting on behalf of the Direzione Centrale della Polizia di Prevenzione cited in connection with the investigation by the Divisione Investigazioni Generali ed Operazioni Speciali) cooperated constantly with foreign secret services and were well aware of all Britel's movements and whatever unlawful treatments he received, from the time of his initial arrest in Pakistan."^[78]
• In 2003, an Algerian named Laid Saidi was abducted in Tanzania and taken to Afghanistan, where he was imprisoned and tortured along with Khalid El-Masri.^[79] His detention appears to have arisen through a mistranslation of a telephone conversation, in which U.S. officials believed he was speaking about airplanes (tairat in Arabic) when he had in fact been speaking about tires (tirat in Arabic).
• Binyam Mohammed, an Ethiopian student who lived in London, was apprehended in Pakistan in April 2002. He allegedly spent three years in "black sites," including in Morocco and Afghanistan. He was supposed to be part of a plot involving José Padilla. The Observer reported: "He went to Pakistan in June 2001 because, he says, he had a drug problem and wanted to kick the habit. He was arrested on 10 April at the airport on his way back to England because of an alleged passport irregularity. Initially interrogated by Pakistani and British officials, he told Stafford Smith: 'The British checked out my story and said they knew I was a nobody. They said they would tell the Americans." He was deprived of sleep by having heavy rock music played loudly throughout the day and night.^[69][80]
• In late 2001 Saddiq Ahmad Turkistani was freed by US forces from a Taliban prison in Kandahar, Afghanistan. At a news conference he told reporters and U.S. officials he had been wrongly imprisoned for allegedly plotting to kill Osama bin Laden. He was then taken to a U.S. military base in Afghanistan, where he was stripped, bound and thrown behind bars. According to U.S. lawyers who represent him, in January 2002 he was sent to the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Nearly four years later, Turkistani remains there, despite being cleared for release early 2005 after a government review concluded he is "no longer an enemy combatant." It is unclear exactly when that determination was made, but Justice Department lawyers gave notice of it in an October 11 court filing.^[81] According to a June 26, 2006 press release from the Saudi Arabian embassy,^[82] Turkistani was released from Guantanamo to Saudi custody
• On 5 April 2006, Amnesty International released details of the United States' system of extraordinary rendition, stating that three Yemeni citizens were held somewhere in Eastern Europe.^[83]
• On February 22, 2008 a report from Amnesty International stated that there was an "admission by the US and UK governments that two rendition flights had landed in Diego Garcia in 2002."^[84]

Debate over legality, utility

Evidence obtained illegally or under duress is inadmissible in US courts, and hampers court cases against suspected terrorists in the US. The trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, the only person to be indicted in the US in connection with the 9/11 attacks, was in part complicated by Moussaoui's requests for access to confidential documents and his assertion of a right to call al-Qaida members held in captivity in Guantanamo Bay Naval Base as witnesses, a demand rejected by government attorneys on the grounds that it would compromise confidential sources.

The House of Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee in their first report published on 15 February 2006, points out that although both the UK and the U.S. have ratified UNCAT, the UK ratified it without reservations, while the US ratified CAT with a reservation that specifies the meaning of "mental pain or suffering" in more detail than Article 1 CAT; and that under U.S. legislation, the term "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment" is interpreted according to the U.S. Constitution, (see Treaty obligations, below). Having made this point the report goes on to say in paragraph 44 that:^[85]

The US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, has denied the use of torture, in response to a letter written by Foreign Secretary Jack Straw on behalf of the United Kingdom as Presidency of the European Union. On 5 December 2005 she said: Rendition is a vital tool in combating trans-national terrorism. Its use is not unique to the United States, or to the current administration...[However] the United States does not permit, tolerate or condone torture under any circumstances.

• The United States has respected—and will continue to respect—the sovereignty of other countries.
• The United States does not transport, and has not transported, detainees from one country to another for the purpose of interrogation under torture.
• The United States does not use the airspace or the airports of any country for the purpose of transporting a detainee to a country where he or she will be tortured.
• The United States has not transported anyone, and will not transport anyone, to a country when we believe he will be tortured. Where appropriate, the United States seeks assurances that transferred people will not be tortured.

While Rice has denied that the CIA used torture, she refused to address the allegations of covert prisons that have caused consternation across Europe and not least in Romania.^[86][87][88]

The ACLU, Physicians Committee for Human Rights and Veterans for America have sought access to presidential directives expressly authorizing extraordinary rendition.^[89] A story published in The NewStandard in December 2005 notes:

To date, there have been no Congressional or other governmental inquiries into the CIA's use of extraordinary renditions, despite repeated calls for such investigations.^[90]

Treaty obligations of the United States

The United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT) Article 3 states:

1. No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.
2. For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.

Any state that is a signatory of the UNCAT and passes an individual to another state "where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture" would be in breach of their treaty obligations, which most Western governments would be reluctant to do.

The United States Senate, however, ratified the treaty with certain reservations, declarations, and understandings, which may alter the nature of their treaty obligation with regard to UNCAT Article 3. Congressional Record S17486-01 II.3 reads "the United States understands the phrase, 'where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture,' as used in Article 3 of the Convention, to mean 'if it is more likely than not that he would be tortured.'" This "understanding" with regard to U.S. ratification perhaps increases the difficulty of proving a treaty violation.^[91]

On May 19, 2006, the United Nations Committee Against Torture (the U.N. body that monitors compliance with the United Nations Convention Against Torture), recommended that the United States cease holding detainees in alleged secret detention facilities, and to publicly condemn any such policy. It also recommended that the United States stop the practice of rendering prisoners to countries where they are likely to be tortured. The decision was made in Geneva following two days of hearings at which a 26-member U.S. delegation defended the practices.^[92][93]

Torture

Some proponents of extraordinary rendition, and the similarly controversial concept of unlawful combatant, agree with Alan Dershowitz that torturing terror suspects, however distasteful, is necessary to help prevent further terrorist attacks, which may only be a matter of hours or days away.^[94] Critics argue, however, that such practices are unethical, unconstitutional, ineffective, and defy the Geneva Conventions.

Investigations

Investigations by multi-nation groups

Council of Europe investigation and its two reports

On November 25, 2005, the lead investigator for the Council of Europe, Swiss lawmaker Dick Marty announced that he had obtained latitude and longitude coordinates for suspected black sites, and he was planning to use satellite imagery over the last several years as part of his investigation. On November 28, 2005, EU Justice Commissioner Franco Frattini asserted that any EU country which had operated a secret prison would have its voting rights suspended.^[95] In a preliminary report, Dick Marty declared that it was "highly unlikely that European governments, or at least their intelligence services, were unaware" of the CIA kidnapping of a "hundred" persons on European territory and their subsequent rendition to countries where they may be tortured.^[96]

The report from the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Council of Europe directed by Dick Marty, and made public on June 7, 2006, was titled: "Alleged secret detentions and unlawful inter-state transfers involving Council of Europe member states."^[97]

Following the publication of this report, the Council of Europe published its draft Recommendation and Resolution document which found grounds for concern with the conduct of both the US and member states of the EU and expresses concern for the disregard of international law and the Geneva Convention. Following a 23 point resolution the document makes five recommendations.

• 1 refers to its Resolution on alleged secret detentions and unlawful inter-state transfers involving Council of Europe member states.
• 2 recalling its previous recommendation on the legality of the detention of persons by the United States in Guantanamo Bay
• 3 urges the Committee of Ministers to draft a recommendation to Council of Europe member States containing:

common measures to guarantee more effectively the human rights of persons suspected of terrorist offences who are captured from, detained in or transported through Council of Europe member States; and a set of minimum requirements for "human rights protection clauses", for inclusion in bilateral and multilateral agreements with third parties, especially those concerning the use of military installations on the territory of Council of Europe member States.

• 4 urgently requests that: an initiative be launched on an international level, expressly involving the United States, an Observer to the Council of Europe, to develop a common, truly global strategy to address the terrorist threat. The strategy should conform in all its elements with the fundamental principles of our common heritage in terms of democracy, human rights and respect for the rule of law. Also, a proposal be considered, in instances where States are unable or unwilling to prosecute persons accused of terrorist acts, to bring these persons within the jurisdiction of an international court that is competent to try them. One possibility worth considering would be to vest such a competence in the International Criminal Court, whilst renewing invitations to join the Court to the United States and other countries that have not yet done so.
• 5 recommends improving the Council of Europe’s ability to react rapidly and effectively to allegations of systematic human rights abuse involving several member States.

Several months before the publication of the Council of Europe report directed by Dick Marty, Gijs de Vries, the EU's antiterrorism coordinator, asserted in April 2006 that no evidence existed that extraordinary rendition had been taking place in Europe. It was also said that the European Union's probe, and a similar one by the continent's leading human rights group had not found any human rights violations nor other crimes that could be proven to the satisfaction of the courts.^[98] This denial from a member of the executive power of the EU institutions has been questioned by the European Parliament report, which was accepted by a vast majority of the Parliament in February 2007 (See below:The European Parliament's February 14, 2007 report).

On the other hand, Dick Marty explained the difference of approach concerning terrorism between the EU and the US as following:

While the states of the Old World have dealt with these threats primarily by means of existing institutions and legal systems, the United States appears to have made a fundamentally different choice: considering that neither conventional judicial instruments nor those established under the framework of the laws of war could effectively counter the new forms of international terrorism, it decided to develop new legal concepts. This legal approach is utterly alien to the European tradition and sensibility, and is clearly contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.^[67]

However, despite Marty's claims, the European Parliament investigations uncovered cooperation between European secret services and governments and the extraordinary renditions programs, making such a clear-cut distinction over-simplistic (see below). Dick Marty himself has not accepted such a dualistic approach, as he showed that for the British government also, the phenomenon of Islamic terrorism was alleged to be so grave that the balance of liberties had to be reconsidered.^[67] Marty's report stated that:

"The compilation of so-called "black lists" of individuals and companies suspected of maintaining connections with organisations considered terrorist and the application of the associated sanctions clearly breach every principle of the fundamental right to a fair trial: no specific charges, no right to be heard, no right of appeal, no established procedure for removing one's name from the list."^[67]

The second report was released on 8 June 2007^[99]

June 27, 2006 Council of Europe resolution

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) accused the United States of operating a "clandestine spiderweb of disappearances, secret detentions and unlawful inter-state transfers" and called for EU regulations governing foreign intelligence services operating in Europe, and demanded “human rights clauses” in military base agreements with the USA.

In a resolution and recommendation approved by a large majority, the Assembly also called for:

• The dismantling by the US of its system of detentions and transfers.
• A review of bilateral agreements between Council of Europe member states and the US, particularly on the status of US forces stationed in Europe and on the use of military and other instrastructures, to ensure they conform to international human rights norms.
• Official apologies and compensation for victims of illegal detentions against whom no formal accusations, nor any court proceedings, have ever been brought
• An international initiative, expressly involving the United States, to develop a common, truly global strategy to address the terrorist threat which conforms to democracy, human rights and the rule of law.^[100]

European Parliament's investigation and report

The European Parliament launched its own investigation into the reports. In April 2006, MEPs leading the investigations expressed concerns that the CIA had conducted more than 1,000 secret flights over European territory since 2001, some to transfer terror suspects to countries that used torture. Investigators said that the same US agents and planes were involved over and over again.^[101] The Parliament adopted a resolution in July 2006 endorsing the Council of Europe's conclusions, mid way through its own investigation into the alleged program.^[102]

In a resolution passed on February 14, 2007 MEPs approved by a large majority (382 voting in favour, 256 against and 74 abstaining) their committee's final report, which criticized the rendition program and concluded that many European countries tolerated illegal CIA activities including secret flights over their territories. The countries named were: Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom.^[103] The report...

Denounces the lack of co-operation of many member states and of the Council of the European Union with the investigation;
Regrets that European countries have been relinquishing control over their airspace and airports by turning a blind eye or admitting flights operated by the CIA which, on some occasions, were being used for illegal transportation of detainees;
Calls for the closure of [the US military detention mission in] Guantanamo and for European countries immediately to seek the return of their citizens and residents who are being held illegally by the US authorities;
Considers that all European countries should initiate independent investigations into all stopovers by civilian aircraft [hired by] the CIA;
Urges that a ban or system of inspections be introduced for all CIA-operated aircraft known to have been involved in extraordinary rendition.^[104]

According to the report, the CIA had operated 1,245 flights, many of them to destinations where suspects could face torture. The Parliament also called for the creation of an independent investigation commission and the closure of the Guantanamo camp. According to Italian Socialist Giovanni Fava, who drafted the document, there was a "strong possibility" that the intelligence obtained under the illegal extraordinary rendition program had been passed on to EU governments who were aware of how it was obtained. The report also uncovered the use of secret detention facilities used in Europe, including Romania and Poland. The report defines extraordinary renditions as instances where "an individual suspected of involvement in terrorism is illegally abducted, arrested and/or transferred into the custody of US officials and/or transported to another country for interrogation which, in the majority of cases involves incommunicado detention and torture".

UN report by Manfred Nowak

Manfred Nowak, a special reporter on torture, has catalogued in a 15-page U.N. report presented to the 191-member General Assembly that the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, France, Sweden and Kyrgyzstan are violating international human rights conventions by deporting terrorist suspects to countries such as Egypt, Syria, Algeria and Uzbekistan, where they may have been tortured.^[105]

"The United States is holding at least 26 persons as “ghost detainees” at undisclosed locations outside of the United States," Human Rights Watch said on December 1, 2005, as it released a list naming some of the detainees. The detainees are being held indefinitely and incommunicado, without legal rights or access to counsel.^[106][107]

Investigations by national governments

France

The French attorney general of Bobigny opened up an instruction in order "to verify the presence in Le Bourget Airport, on July 20, 2005, of the plane numbered N50BH." This instruction was opened following a complaint deposed in December 2005 by the Ligue des droits de l'homme (LDH) NGO ("Human Rights League") and the International Federation of Human Rights Leagues (FIDH) NGO on charges of "arbitrary detention", "crime of torture" and "non-respect of the rights of war prisoners". It has as objective to determine if the plane was used to transport CIA prisoners to Guantanamo Bay detainment camp and if the French authorities had knowledge of this stop. However, the lawyer defending the LDH declared that he was surprised that the instruction was only opened on January 20, 2006, and that no verifications had been done before. On December 2, 2005, conservative newspaper Le Figaro had revealed the existence of two CIA planes that had landed in France, suspected of transporting CIA prisoners. But the instruction concerned only N50BH, which was a Gulfstream III, which would have landed at Le Bourget on July 20, 2005, coming from Oslo, Norway. The other suspected aircraft would have landed in Brest on March 31, 2002. It is investigated by the Canadian authorities, as it would have been flying from St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador in Canada, via Keflavík in Iceland before going to Turkey.^[108]

Spain

In November 2005, Spanish newspaper El País reported that CIA planes had landed in the Canary Islands and in Palma de Mallorca. An attorney opened up an investigation concerning these landings which, according to Madrid, were made without official knowledge, thus being a breach of national sovereignty.^{[109][110][111]}

Germany

Business daily Handelsblatt reported November 24, 2005, that the CIA still uses an American military base in Germany to transport terrorism suspects without informing the German government. The Berliner Zeitung reported the following day there was documentation of 85 takeoffs and landings by planes with a "high probability" of being operated by the CIA, at Ramstein, the Rhein-Main Air Base and others. The newspaper cited experts and "plane-spotters" who observed the planes as responsible for the tally.^[112]

Kosovo

In 2002, the Council of Europe's Human rights commissioner Alvaro Gil-Robles witnessed "a smaller version of Guantanamo", he told France's Le Monde newspaper.^[113][114] Gil-Robles told the daily he had inspected the centre, located within the US military's Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo, in 2002, to investigate reports of extrajudicial arrests by NATO-led peacekeepers.^[115]

Italy

One notable example is the "Imam Rapito affair" in Italy, in which Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr (aka Abu Omar), a radical Islamist cleric, was kidnapped in a joint CIA–SISMI operation in Milan on February 17, 2003, was transferred to the Aviano Air Base, and was rendered to Egypt, where he was held until February 11, 2007, when an Egyptian court ruled his imprisonment was "unfounded."^[116] He claims he was tortured both on the Aviano Base and in Egypt. Italian prosecutors investigating the kidnapping, and have indicted 26 US citizens including the head of CIA in Italy Jeffrey W. Castelli and 24 other CIA agents. They have also sent extradition requests to the Italian Ministry of Justice, which has not delivered it to American authorities. SISMI chief General Nicolò Pollari and second-in-command Marco Mancini have been forced to resign, and were also indicted. On 4 November 2009, an Italian judge found 23 Americans and 2 Italians guilty. The sentences ranged from 5–8 years for the Americans and 3 years each for the Italians. All of the Americans were convicted in absentia, as the Italian government has refused or ignored all requests to move the trials to the United States and the American government has refused or ignored all extradition requests.^[117]

Portugal

Portugal opened up an investigation concerning CIA flights in February 2007, on the basis of declarations by Socialist MEP Ana Gomes and by Rui Costa Pinto, journalist of Visão review. The Portuguese general prosecutor, Cândida Almeida, head of the Central Investigation and Penal Action Department (DCIAP), announced the opening of investigations on February 5, 2007. They were to be centered on the issue of "torture or inhuman and cruel treatment," and instigated by allegations of "illegal activities and serious human rights violations" made by MEP Ana Gomes to the attorney general, Pinto Monteiro, on January 26, 2007.^[118] In February 2008, the UK NGO Reprieve published a report based on flight logs obtained by Ana Gomes, confirming that over 728 prisoners were flown to Guantánamo through Portuguese airspace, and hence through Portuguese jurisdiction, in at least 28 flights.^[119]

One of the most critic voice against the scarce collaboration provided by the Portuguese government to the European Parliament Commission which investigated CIA flights, Ana Gomes declared that, although she had no doubt that permission of these illegal flights were frequent during Durão Barroso (2002–2004) and Santana Lopes (2004–2005)' governments, "during the [Socialist] government of José Sócrates [2005– ], 24 flights which passed through Portuguese territory" are registered.^[120] Active in the TDIP commission, Ana Gomes complained about the Portuguese state's reluctance to provide information, leading her to tensions with the Foreign minister, Luís Amado, member of the same party. Ana Gomes declared herself satisfied with the opening of the investigations, but underlined that she had always claimed that a parliamentary inquiry would be necessary.^[118]

On the other hand, journalist Rui Costa Pinto was heard by the DCIAP, as he had written an article, refused by Visão, about flights passing by Lajes Field, a Portuguese airbase used by the US Air Forces, in the Azores.^[118]

Approximately 150 CIA flights which have flown through Portugal have been identified.^[121]

United Kingdom

After claims by Liberty that British airports had been used by the CIA for extraordinary rendition flights, the Association of Chief Police Officers launched an investigation in November, 2005. The report was published in June, 2007 and found no evidence to support the claim. This was on the same day the Council of Europe released its report with evidence that the UK had colluded in extraordinary rendition, thus directly contradicting ACPO's findings. Liberty has challenged the findings and has stated that its original claims were based on "credible evidence".^[122]

In July 2007, the government's Intelligence and Security Committee released their Rendition report, detailing U.S. and U.K. activities and policies.^[123][124]

On February 21, 2008, British Foreign Secretary David Miliband admitted (despite previous government denials) that two U.S. extraordinary rendition flights had stopped on Diego Garcia in 2002, a U.K. territory.^[125] When questioned as to whether the government had deliberately misled the public over rendition, the Foreign Secretary apologied and stated that the government had simply "made a mistake". His statement also laid out the current UK Government view on Extraordinary rendition;

Our counter-terrorism relationship with the United States is vital to UK security. I am absolutely clear that there must and will continue to be the strongest possible intelligence and counter-terrorism relationship with the US, consistent with UK law and our international obligations.

As part of our close co-operation, there has long been a regular exchange with the US authorities, in which we have set out: that we expect them to seek permission to render detainees via UK territory and airspace, including Overseas Territories; that we will grant that permission only if we are satisfied that the rendition would accord with UK law and our international obligations; and how we understand our obligations under the UN Convention Against Torture.^[126]

—David Miliband

Romania

Franco Frattini the European Union Justice Commissioner requested an explanation from the governments of Poland and Romania about the accusations made by Dick Marty. Doris Mircea (Romanian spokeswoman in Brussels) replied to this in November 2007 in a letter stating "no person was kept illegally as a prisoner within Romanian jails and no illegal transfer of detainees passed through Romanian territory" and that that was the official finding of a committee of inquiry set up by the government to investigate the accusations.^[127]

Investigations by non-state actors

Shannon Airport, Ireland

The government of Ireland has come under internal and external pressure to inspect airplanes at Shannon Airport to investigate whether or not they contain extraordinary rendition captives.^[128][129] Police at Shannon have said that they have received political instruction not to approach, search or otherwise interfere with US aircraft suspected of being involved in extraordinary rendition flights. Ireland has been censured by the European Parliament for its role in facilitating extraordinary rendition and taking insufficient or no measures to uphold its obligations under the UN CAT.^[130]

The situation is complicated at Shannon Airport because passengers flying to the USA are cleared for immigration to the USA by U.S. Department of Homeland Security Bureau of Customs and Border Protection before boarding the flights and are kept in a "sterile gate lounge"^[131]

Craig Murray 2003 revelations

In 2003, the United Kingdom's Ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, suggested that it was "wrong to use information gleaned from torture".^[132] In March 2003 he was informed in the London offices of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) by Sir Michael Wood, chief Legal Adviser, that it was not illegal under the UN Convention Against Torture for the UK to obtain or to use intelligence gained under torture, provided the British government itself did not use torture or request that a named individual be tortured.

The unanimous Law Lords judgment on December 8, 2005 confirmed this position. They ruled that, under English law tradition, "torture and its fruits" could not be used in court.^[133] But the information thus obtained could be used by the British police and security services as "it would be ludicrous for them to disregard information about a ticking bomb if it had been procured by torture."^[134] The Law Lords thus dismissed concerns about the validity of information obtained under torture, which have been expressed by various security agents and human rights activists.

Murray's accusations did not lead to any investigation by his employer, the FCO, and he resigned after disciplinary action was taken against him in 2004. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office itself is being investigated by the National Audit Office because of accusations that it has victimized, bullied and intimidated its own staff.^[135]

Murray later stated that he felt that he had unwittingly stumbled upon what has been called "torture by proxy".^[136] He thought that Western countries moved people to regimes and nations where it was known that information would be extracted by torture, and made available to them.

Murray states that he was aware from August 2002 "that the CIA were bringing in detainees to Tashkent from Bagram airport Afghanistan, who were handed over to the Uzbek security services (SNB). I presumed at the time that these were all Uzbek nationals — that may have been a false presumption. I knew that the CIA were obtaining intelligence from their subsequent interrogation by the SNB." He goes on to say that he did not know at the time that any non-Uzbek nationals were flown to Uzbekistan and although he has studied the reports by several journalists and finds their reports credible he is not a firsthand authority on this issue.^[137]

World Policy Council report

The World Policy Council, headed by Ambassador Horace Dawson and Senator Edward Brooke, criticized the Bush Administration in the area of civil and human rights for its policy on extraordinary rendition. The Council concluded in its report that extraordinary rendition

1) not only frustrates legitimate efforts to prosecute terrorists, but it makes a mockery of the high sounding principles that we hear invoked constantly.
2) robs us of the moral high ground and our justification for leadership in the world.
3) lowers us to the level of all those rogue and evil regimes that we have fought against in the past and against which we claim we are now struggling.^[138]

David Davis accusations

During a House of Commons debate on 7 July 2009, MP David Davis accused the UK government of outsourcing torture, by allowing Rangzieb Ahmed to leave the country (even though they had evidence against him upon which he was later convicted for terrorism) to Pakistan, where it is said the Inter-Services Intelligence was given the go ahead by the British intelligence agencies to torture Ahmed. Davis further accused the government of trying to gag Ahmed, stopping him coming forward with his accusations, after he had been imprisoned back in the UK. He said, there was "an alleged request to drop his allegations of torture: if he did that, they could get his sentence cut and possibly give him some money. If this request to drop the torture case is true, it is frankly monstrous. It would at the very least be a criminal misuse of the powers and funds under the Government's Contest strategy, and at worst a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice."^[139]

Public revelations concerning the extraordinary renditions

Furthermore, Amnesty International mentions Muhammad al-Assad, Salah Nasser Salim ‘Ali and Muhammad Faraj Ahmed Bashmilah. The three, all nationals of Yemen, had "disappeared" in 2003, and had been kept in complete isolation — even from each other — in a series of secret detention centres run apparently by US agents.^[140]

Based upon statements by current and former intelligence officials and diplomats from three continents, the Washington Post reported that captives might be subject to techniques of interrogation illegal in the United States.^[141] Since it might violate US law these suspects are flown to facilities around the world. Eight countries have been implicated, including Thailand, Afghanistan and several democracies in Eastern Europe, as well as a small center at the Guantánamo Bay prison in Cuba.

The CIA and the White House strongly resist any in-depth investigation into the details of rendition, refusing to release information on the subjects detained and the facilities used throughout the world.^[142] Critics think this procedure might be kept from scrutiny as it could result in legal challenges to the U.S. government, inside the U.S. as well as in those countries used for detention.^[143][144] (For a more detailed discussion on these possible violations of U.S. and international law please see below and unlawful combatant.)

"Erroneous rendition"

An article published in the December 5, 2005, Washington Post reported that the CIA's Inspector General was investigating what it calls erroneous renditions.^[145] The term appears to refer to cases in which innocent people were subjected to extraordinary rendition.

Khalid El-Masri is the most well-known person who is believed to have been subjected to the process of "extraordinary rendition," as a result of mistaken identity. Laid Saidi, an Algerian detained and tortured along with El-Masri, was apprehended apparently because of a taped telephone conversation in which the word tirat, meaning "tires" in Arabic, was mistaken for the word tairat, meaning "airplanes."^[79]

The Post's anonymous sources say that the Inspector General is looking into a number of similar cases — possibly as many as thirty innocent men who were captured and transported through what has been called "erroneous renditions."

A December 27, 2005 story quotes anonymous CIA insiders claiming there have been 10 or fewer of such erroneous renditions.^[90] It names the CIA's inspector general, John Helgerson, as the official responsible for the inquiry.

The AP story quotes Tom Malinowski, Washington office director of Human Rights Watch who said:

"I am glad the CIA is investigating the cases that they are aware of, but by definition you are not going to be aware of all such cases, when you have a process designed to avoid judicial safeguards."^[90]

Obama Executive Order opposes rendition torture and establishes Special Task Force

Two days after President Barack Obama was sworn into office, on January 22, 2009, he signed an executive order entitled Ensuring Lawful Interrogations.

This order specifically addresses the practice of transferring individuals to other nations in order to ensure that such practices comply with the domestic laws, international obligations, and policies of the United States.^[8] It establishes a committee that will provide recommendations within 180 days of the executive order. It specifically has as its goal a process to ensure that the United States practices do not result in the transfer of individuals to other nations to face torture or otherwise for the purpose, or with the effect, of undermining or circumventing the commitments or obligations of the United States to ensure the humane treatment of individuals in its custody or control. However, the executive order did not end the practice of rendition by the United States.^[8]

The section of the Executive Order relating to extraordinary rendition is as follows:

(e) Mission. The mission of the Special Task Force shall be: (i) to study and evaluate whether the interrogation practices and techniques in Army Field Manual 2 22.3, when employed by departments or agencies outside the military, provide an appropriate means of acquiring the intelligence necessary to protect the Nation, and, if warranted, to recommend any additional or different guidance for other departments or agencies; and (ii) to study and evaluate the practices of transferring individuals to other nations in order to ensure that such practices comply with the domestic laws, international obligations, and policies of the United States and do not result in the transfer of individuals to other nations to face torture or otherwise for the purpose, or with the effect, of undermining or circumventing the commitments or obligations of the United States to ensure the humane treatment of individuals in its custody or control. (f) Administration. The Special Task Force shall be established for administrative purposes within the Department of Justice and the Department of Justice shall, to the extent permitted by law and subject to the availability of appropriations, provide administrative support and funding for the Special Task Force. (g) Recommendations. The Special Task Force shall provide a report to the President, through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs and the Counsel to the President, on the matters set forth in subsection (d) within 180 days of the date of this order, unless the Chair determines that an extension is necessary. (h) Termination. The Chair shall terminate the Special Task Force upon the completion of its duties.

However, on November 2, 2009 the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that victims of extraordinary rendition cannot sue Washington for torture suffered overseas, because Congress has not authorized such lawsuits, in ruling on Canadian citizen Maher Arar’s case.^[146]

See also

• Aero Contractors — one of several companies that are reported to provide air transport in extraordinary rendition cases.
• Aircraft spotting
• Alliance Base and CTIC (Counter-terrorism Information Centers, joint intelligence operations)
• Arbitrary arrest and detention
• At the Center of the Storm: My Years at the CIA by George Tenet
• Black site
• Central Intelligence Agency
• Special Activities Division
• Command responsibility
• Criticisms of the War on Terrorism
• Enemy combatant or Unlawful combatant
• Erroneous rendition
• Exfiltration
• Extrajudicial punishment
• Extraordinary Rendition — an upcoming movie directed by Jim Threapleton, starring Omar Berdouni and Andy Serkis
• Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
• Forced disappearance
• Ghost detainee
• Jeppesen — a Boeing subsidiary that is reported to provide navigation and logistical support.
• Luis Posada Carriles, an anti-Castrist Cuban wanted by Venezuela for the 1976 bombing of Cubana Flight 455, which the US has refused to extradite in 2006 to Venezuela, on claims that he was not sufficiently enough protected from risks of torture in this last state.
• Main Core
• Michael Scheuer
• Rendition aircraft
• Rendition — a movie directed by Gavin Hood, starring Jake Gyllenhaal, Reese Witherspoon and Meryl Streep
• Tepper Aviation
• Torture and the United States
• Unitary Executive
• War on terror

Bibliography

• Grey, Stephen (2006). Ghost Plane: The True Story of the CIA Torture Program. New York, New York: St. Martin's Press. ISBN 0-312-36023-1.
• Thompson, A. C., and Trevor Paglen (2006). Torture Taxi: On the Trail of the CIA's Rendition Flights. Hoboken, New Jersey: Melville House. ISBN 1-933633-09-3.

Notes

External links

2009

• Obama's Plans to Send 100 Yemeni Terrorists to Saudi Arabia

2008

• All Party Parliamentary Group on Extraordinary Rendition
• Was Romanian base a CIA prisoner site? MSNBC February 23, 2008
• CIA confirms rendition flights to Brits MSNBC February 21, 2008
• CIA Antiwar Radio with Scott Horton and Charles Goyette interview Michael Scheuer, Antiwar.com April 17, 2008 (Note: minutes 20–27 of 41 minute audio)
• Clive Stafford Smith: US Holding 27,000 in Secret Overseas Prisons; Transporting Prisoners to Iraqi Jails to Avoid Media & Legal Scrutiny Democracy Now! May 19, 2008
• Spotlight: Mystery Flights Link TV 2 minute preview

2007

• "Eight O'Clock Ferry to the Windward Side: Seeking Justice in Guantanamo Bay" interview with Clive Stafford Smith Democracy Now! October 11, 2007
• Video of Press Conference for Smithfield, NC Anti War and Anti Torture Rally and Protest, Google, October 26, 2007
• Video of NC Stop Torture Now Walk of Remembrance Memorial at Aero Contractors in Smithfield, NC AntiWar and AntiTorture Protest, VideoLive, October 27, 2007
• Video of NC Stop Torture Now 8 Arrested in Civil Disobedience at Aero Contractors in Smithfield, NC, Google, April 9, 2007
• Extraordinary Rendition, a report broadcast on Channel 4's Dispatches, June 11, 2007
• Investigation into Extraordinary Rendition, broadcast on BBC 2's This World, May 24, 2007
• Video of protest at Aero Contractors, YouTube, March 18, 2007
• Soviet-era compound in northern Poland was site of secret CIA interrogation, detentions, Raw Story, March 7, 2007
• EU to vote on CIA flights report, BBC News Online, February 14, 2007
• CIA Rendition Flights, The Guardian, ongoing coverage
• Rendition: legal news and resources, JURIST
• Britain accused over CIA's secret torture flights, Stephen Grey and Andrew Buncombe, The Independent and Independent on Sunday, 10 February 2005 (mirror)
• Richard Clarke, Against all Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror, Free Press, 2004, ISBN 0-7432-6024-4
• Rendition Not a New tactic. 1987–89
• An Open Letter to George Bush partly on this issue
• International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance
• counter-terrorism-law.org
• A film report on allegations that Pakistan's security forces has secretly detained hundreds of people over the war on terror, More4 News
• Torture, Four Corners, ABC TV
• 'Ghost Prisoners, Four Corners, ABC TV
• Extraordinary Antics, al-Jazeera English June 12, 2007

2006

• Stop Rendition and Secret Detention!, Amnesty International
• Protest at US Embassy, London, against CIA 'torture flights', Liberty, 25 June
• Rendered Meaningless: The Rule of Law in the US 'War on Terror', JURIST, March 27, 2006
• Torture flights landed in UK, admit air controllers, Marie Woolf, The Independent, 19 February 2006
• House Committee Squashes Torture Queries, Associated Press, February 8, 2006
• A Torturing Topic, Pocono Record, February 18, 2006, discussing lecture by Matthew McNabb
• Report: U.S. 'Outsourced' Torture, Associated Press, January 24
• Rendition: the cover-up, New Statesman, January 23, 2006
• Ugly phrase conceals an uglier truth, Salman Rushdie, Sydney Morning Herald, January 10, 2006
• The Horrors of Extraordinary Rendition: A Personal Account, Maher Arar, CounterPunch, October 27 – 29 October 2006

2005

• Exporting Torture: US Rendition and European Outrage, JURIST, December 13, 2005
• The Real War on Terror - Kidnap and torture, American style, Dispatches, Channel 4, November 23, 2005
• Spanish police expose more CIA links to secret flights of detainees, The Guardian, November 15, 2005
• Torture flights: our role in US brutality shames Britain Sunday Herald, October 16, 2005
• Torture Flights: The Inside Story Neil Mackay, Sunday Herald, October 16, 2005
• Police to probe US ‘torture flights’ landing in Scotland, Neil Mackay, Sunday Herald, October 23, 2005
• Europeans eye CIA secret jails claim — What the Media won't tell Clayton Hallmark, Chiapas IMC, November 5, 2005
• Navy Secretly Contracted Jets Used by CIA, Boston Globe, September 24, 2005
• Rendition Cindy Sheehan? CIA Fugitive From Italy Justice Is Located
• 'One of them made cuts in my penis. I was in agony', Benyam Mohammed, The Guardian, August 2, 2005
• New Swedish Documents Illuminate CIA Action: Probe Finds 'Rendition' Of Terror Suspects Illegal, Washington Post, May 21, 2005
• Flight to torture: where abuse is contracted out by Tim Reid, The Times, 26 March 2005
• Jet's Travels Cloaked in Mystery John Crewdson and Tom Hundley (Knight-Ridder), Common Dreams, March 20, 2005
• Torture by Proxy, Editorial Los Angeles Times, 11 March 2005
• CIA given free hand for 'rendition,' says official, Taipei Times, 8 March 2005
• CIA Flying Suspects To Torture?, CBS News, March 6, 2005
• It's Called Torture, Op-Ed by Bob Herbert, New York Times, February 28, 2005 (mirror)
• Hair used to verify Afghan abduction claim, Paktribune.com, February 4, 2005
• They beat me from all sides, The Guardian, January 14, 2005

2004

• Markey pledges battle on rendition practice, Boston Globe, November 30, 2004
• Memo Lets CIA Take Detainees Out of Iraq, Washington Post, October 24, 2004
• A Secret Deportation Of Terror Suspects, Washington Post, July 25, 2004
• Kalla fakta, 2004, The broken promise, TV4 (Sweden), May 17, 2004
• Stephen Grey, 2004, America's Gulag, New Statesman, May 17, 2004
• Secret World of U.S. Interrogation", Washington Post, May 11, 2004

2003

• Deported to Syria by U.S., Canadian tells tale of torture, Associated Press, November 5, 2003
• Deported Terror Suspect Details Torture in Syria, Washington Post, November 5, 2003
• Playing Offense: The inside story of how U.S. terrorist hunters are going after al Qaeda, US News & World Report, June 2, 2003
• Questioning Terror Suspects in a Dark and Surreal World, New York Times, March 9, 2003

2002

• U.S. Decries Abuse but Defends Interrogations, Washington Post, December 26, 2002
• U.S. Behind Secret Transfer of Terror Suspects, Washington Post, March 11, 2002

2001

• Broad Effort Launched After '98 Attacks, Washington Post, December 19, 2001

CIA secret prisons and detainees Suspected black site prisons The Salt Pit, Dark prison, Diego Garcia, Stare Kiejkuty, Szczytno-Szymany, Mihail Kogălniceanu, Camp Nama, Camp Eggers, Strawberry Fields (Guantanamo) Held in The Salt Pit Khalid El-Masri, Laid Saidi, Gul Rahman (died in custody) Held in The dark prison Jamil al-Banna, Abd al-Salam Ali al-Hila, Bisher Amin Khalil al-Rawi, Hassin Bin Attash, Laid Saidi, Binyam Mohammed, Musab Omar Ali Al Mudwani, Walid al Qadasi Held in unknown black sites Mohammed Omar Abdel-Rahman, Mustafa Setmariam Nasar, Redha al-Najar, Mohammed Naeem Noor Khan, Mustafa al-Hawsawi, Ahmed Ghailani, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, Waleed Muhammad bin Attash, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, Abu Zubaydah, Abu Faraj al-Libi, Ammar al-Baluchi, Hambali, Mohamad Farik Amin, Mohammed Nazir Bin Lep, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Majid Khan, Gouled Hassan Dourad, Saud Memon (died a month after release), Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi (died 2009)