index  |  next>>

Introduction

Human Rights Watch welcomes the Council of Europe’s Group of Specialists on Human Rights and the Fight against Terrorism (DH-S-TER) reflection and continuing debate on the human rights implications of the use of diplomatic assurances in transfers of terrorism suspects to places where they are at risk of torture and other ill-treatment. The objections of Human Rights Watch and a range of international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to the use of diplomatic assurances are detailed in two joint statements already submitted to the Council of Europe for consideration in the course of this debate.¹

At its December 2005 meeting, the DH-S-TER concluded that it lacked information about the practice of states in the use of diplomatic assurances. The DH-S-TER subsequently distributed a questionnaire requesting such information from Steering Committee on Human Rights (CDDH) member states and observers, to inform the group’s deliberations at its next meeting, scheduled for March 29-31, 2006. As of March 15, 2006, seventeen member states and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) had responded to the questionnaire.

This paper offers a commentary prepared by Human Rights Watch on the state responses received by the DH-S-TER. Human Rights Watch and other NGOs have already written in detail about state practice with respect to the use of diplomatic assurances against torture and other ill-treatment.² 

This paper contains a commentary and updates on a range of cases of actual transfers based on assurances from Europe, and other developments in state practice and accountability for the use of assurances. We do not address every example provided by states, but prioritize responses from states on which Human Rights Watch has conducted research and advocacy, or individual cases in which Human Rights Watch has been involved.

---