By Lara Kajs
Thinking Out Loud
Despite the universal prohibition of torture under international law, governments around the world continue to employ it directly or indirectly. One of the most controversial mechanisms has been the practice of extraordinary rendition, in which detainees are secretly transferred to foreign prisons where abusive interrogation is more likely to occur. The system exposes the tension between national security policy and the international legal norms designed to protect human dignity.
Torture is explicitly prohibited under international law. The United Nations Convention Against Torture defines it as the intentional infliction of severe physical or mental suffering for purposes such as obtaining information, punishment, intimidation, or coercion when carried out by, or with the consent of, public officials. Yet despite this clear legal prohibition, torture remains widely practiced across the world.
Some governments employ torture openly as a tool of repression. Others avoid direct responsibility by enabling or outsourcing abusive practices through covert programs such as the United States’ extraordinary rendition system.
Torture as a Tool of State Power
More than 170 countries have ratified the Convention Against Torture, but enforcement remains uneven and impunity widespread. Across political systems and geographic regions, torture continues to be used as a mechanism of political control, criminal interrogation, and intimidation.
In Syria, the Assad regime became notorious for systematic torture in detention facilities during the country’s civil war. Investigations by human rights organizations documented widespread abuse in intelligence prisons such as Sednaya, where detainees were subjected to beatings, electrocution, starvation, and other forms of brutal treatment.
China has also faced international criticism for the treatment of Uyghur Muslims in Xinjiang. Reports from survivors and investigators describe forced confessions, sleep deprivation, and sexual abuse within the network of so-called “re-education camps.” Chinese authorities deny these allegations, characterizing the facilities as counter-extremism programs.
Similar patterns appear elsewhere. Egyptian security forces have been repeatedly accused of torture against political detainees following the 2013 military coup. In Iran, political prisoners and protesters have reported interrogations involving beatings, mock executions, and prolonged solitary confinement. Russian security services have likewise been implicated in torture both domestically and in occupied territories, including filtration centers used during the war in Ukraine.
These examples illustrate that torture is not confined to any single ideology or political system.
Extraordinary Rendition
While the United States formally prohibits torture, the post-9/11 counterterrorism framework created mechanisms that allowed the practice to occur indirectly. Extraordinary rendition refers to the covert transfer of detainees to foreign countries for interrogation outside normal legal processes.
By bypassing extradition procedures and judicial oversight, rendition placed individuals in environments where abusive interrogation methods were more likely to occur. Critics argue that the program violated the Convention Against Torture, which prohibits transferring detainees to states where there is a substantial risk of torture.
Legal scholars also questioned whether rendition violated constitutional protections such as due process and habeas corpus. However, many court challenges failed because governments invoked the “state secrets” doctrine, which limits judicial review of classified national security programs.
CIA Black Sites
The rendition system operated alongside a network of secret CIA detention facilities known as “black sites.” These prisons were located in countries including Poland, Lithuania, Thailand, and Afghanistan.
Detainees were subjected to so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques,” including waterboarding, stress positions, and prolonged sensory deprivation—methods widely recognized by legal experts as forms of torture.
Several high-profile cases exposed the human consequences of the program.
Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen, was detained by U.S. authorities in 2002 and transferred to Syria, where he was tortured for nearly a year before being released without charges. A Canadian inquiry later cleared him of wrongdoing and awarded compensation.
Similarly, German citizen Khalid El-Masri was abducted after being mistakenly identified as a terrorism suspect. He was detained for months in Afghanistan before being quietly released. The European Court of Human Rights later ruled his detention unlawful.
European governments also faced criticism for allowing rendition flights to use their airspace or for hosting CIA detention sites. In 2006, the European Parliament condemned the program and called for greater transparency.
Security Versus Human Rights
Supporters of extraordinary rendition argued that unconventional threats required unconventional responses. They claimed that traditional legal frameworks were insufficient for confronting transnational terrorist networks.
However, numerous investigations have questioned both the legality and effectiveness of torture. The U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee’s 2014 report concluded that the CIA’s interrogation program was not only abusive but also failed to produce reliable intelligence.
Coerced confessions are inherently unreliable. Individuals subjected to extreme physical or psychological pain will often say whatever they believe will end the suffering.
The Global Consequences
When democratic states undermine international norms, the consequences extend far beyond their own borders. The use of torture—or even the perception that it is tolerated—weakens the credibility of international human rights frameworks and emboldens authoritarian governments to justify their own abuses.
Ending torture requires more than legal prohibition. It requires political accountability, transparency, and consistent enforcement of international law.
Without these safeguards, the global prohibition against torture risks becoming little more than a principle honored in theory but violated in practice.
Photo credit: The Garden of Good and Evil by Amandabslater. Licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0. The Garden of Good and Evil ~ Alfredo Jaar, 2017. The steel cells reference “black sites,” the secret detention facilities around the world operated by the US CIA. The structures are partly obscured from view, in the same way as the “black sites,” and the torturous activity happening is hidden from public view. The cells have a one-square-meter base inspired by the poem, “One Square Metre of Prison” by the Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish, who was imprisoned many times and spent much of his life in exile.
Published 28 June 2025
About Thinking Out Loud
Thinking Out Loud is a commentary series by Lara Kajs examining international law, humanitarian crises, and the prevention of mass atrocities. Drawing on field experience in conflict and displacement settings, the column explores the legal and policy challenges that shape contemporary conflicts
Lara Kajs is the founder and executive director of The Genocide Report, a Washington, DC-based educational nonprofit focused on atrocity prevention and international law. She is the author of several field-based books on conflict, displacement, humanitarian crises, and international humanitarian law, drawing on extensive research and field experience in Yemen, Syria, and Afghanistan. Her writing and public speaking focus on atrocity crimes, forced displacement, the protection of civilians, and the legal frameworks governing armed conflict.