Human rights fact-finding and the CIA’s rendition,detention and interrogation programme: A response to Cordell

Abstract

In her article, ‘Measuring extraordinary rendition and international cooperation’, Rebecca Cordell seeks to subject the Rendition Flights Database to a model-based, statistical analysis. She argues that her analysis suggests that more countries were involved in the CIA’s rendition programme than our work has previously established, and that many more flights in the database are likely to be connected to rendition operations than we have identified. While we would not dispute the likelihood that both of these statements are correct, and we have always presented our findings with an acknowledgement that they provide a necessarily limited account of the rendition, detention and interrogation (RDI) programme, we suggest that Cordell’s work should be approached with some caution. This is so for two reasons. First, her findings – although derived through a different mode of analysis from our own – do not appear to move beyond those we have already published. Second, because Cordell has not triangulated her analysis with either data relating to transfers of specific prisoners, or with evidence relating to which countries hosted prisons for the CIA and the operational dates for these prisons, we question her claim that the flights she has identified from the Database are ‘likely rendition flights’. We aim to demonstrate the importance of having a clear understanding of the limitations of big data when researching violations of human rights, especially where such data is related to covert operations. We also seek to show why the Renditions Flights Database only has merit when it is triangulated with a wide range of supplementary sources, including first-hand accounts by prisoners themselves, declassified documents from the US Government, and the findings of parliamentary, journalist and legal investigations. It is this process of triangulation which gives the flight data meaning and which makes it of value for establishing the facts of human rights abuses.

Keywords

Rendition CIA human rights fact-finding the Rendition Project research methods

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Black

Raphael

(2015) Revealed: The boom and bust of the CIA’s secret torture sites. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, 14 October. Available at: www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2015/10/14/revealed-cia-torture-black-sites-history-boom-bust/ (accessed 2 October 2017).

Blakeley

Raphael

(2016) Laid Saidi. Available at: https://www.therenditionproject.org.uk/prisoners/saidi.html (accessed 2 October 2017).

Cordell

(2017) Measuring extraordinary rendition and international cooperation International Area Studies Review 20 (2): 179–197.

Goldman

(2007) Secret jails: Terror suspect’s odyssey through CIA’s ‘black sites’. London: Associated Press.

International Committee of the Red Cross (2007) ICRC Report on the treatment of fourteen ‘high value detainees’ in CIA custody, February. Available at: www.therenditionproject.org.uk/pdf/PDF%20101%20[ICRC,%20Feb%202007.%20Report%20on%20Treatment%20of%2014%20HVD%20in%20CIA%20Custody].pdf (accessed 2 October 2017).

Raphael

Blakeley

(2013) Rendition Flights Database, 22 May. Available at: www.therenditionproject.org.uk/flights/index.html (accessed 2 October 2017).

Raphael

Blakeley

(2013) Rendition Circuit: 1–19 September 2002. Available at: https://www.therenditionproject.org.uk/flights/renditions/N379P-020911.html (accessed 2 October 2017).

Raphael

Blakeley

(2013) Rendition Circuit: 6–13 February 2003. Available at: https://www.therenditionproject.org.uk/flights/renditions/N379P-030206.html (accessed 2 October 2017).

Raphael

Blakeley

(2013) Rendition Circuit: 3–6 December 2002. Available at: https://www.therenditionproject.org.uk/flights/renditions/N63MU-021203.html (accessed 2 October 2017).

10.

Raphael

Blakeley

(2013) Rendition Circuit: 26–30 March 2004. Available at: https://www.therenditionproject.org.uk/flights/renditions/N85VM-040326.html (accessed 2 October 2017).

11.

Raphael

Blakeley

(2013) and Rendition Circuit: 11–13 April 2004. Available at: https://www.therenditionproject.org.uk/flights/renditions/N85VM-040411.html (accessed 2 October 2017).

12.

Raphael

Blakeley

(2013) Rendition Circuit: 16–17 February 2005. Available at: https://www.therenditionproject.org.uk/flights/renditions/N724CL-050216.html (accessed 2 October 2017).

13.

Raphael

Blakeley

(2013) Rendition Circuit: 14–20 February 2005. Available at: https://www.therenditionproject.org.uk/flights/renditions/N787WH-050214.html (accessed 2 October 2017).

14.

Raphael

et al . (2015) Tracking rendition aircraft as a way to understand CIA secret detention and torture in Europe. The International Journal of Human Rights 20(1): 78–103.

15.

Root

(2016) Numbers are only human. Lessons for human rights practitioners from the quantitative literacy movement. In: Alston

Knuckey

(eds) The Transformation of Human Rights Fact-Finding. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp.355–376.

16.

US Department of Justice (2009) Report: Investigation into the Office of Legal Counsel’s memoranda concerning issues relating to the Central Intelligence Agency’s use of ‘Enhanced Interrogation Techniques’ on suspected terrorists. Office of Professional Responsibility, Department of Justice, 29 July. Available at: https://www.aclu.org/files/pdfs/natsec/opr20100219/20090729_OPR_Final_Report_with_20100719_declassifications.pdf (accessed 2 October 2017).

17.

US Office of the Inspector General (2004) Special Review: Counterterrorism Detention and Interrogation Activities (September 2001–October 2003). 7 May. Available at: www.therenditionproject.org.uk/pdf/PDF%2020%20[CIA%20IG%20Investigation%20EITs%202004].pdf (accessed 2 October 2017).

18.

US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) (2014) Committee study of the Central Intelligence Agency’s detention and interrogation Program, declassified Executive Summary. 3 December. Available at: www.therenditionproject.org.uk/documents/RDI/141209-SSCI-Torture_Report_Executive_Summary.pdf (accessed 2 October 2017).

19.

US Supreme Court (2004) Rasul et al. v. Bush, President of the United States, et al., 28 June. Available at: www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/03-334.ZS.html (accessed 2 October 2017).