Editing Extraordinary rendition (section)

== Definitions ==
[[Rendition (law)|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 that is extralegal, i.e. outside the law (see: [[kidnapping]]). 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, the term is widely used to describe such practices, particularly the initial apprehension. This latter usage extends to the transfer of suspected terrorists by the US to countries known to torture prisoners or employ harsh interrogation techniques that may rise to the level of torture.<ref name="MJC-2009-09-08">Michael John Garcia, Legislative Attorney American Law Division. [https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32890.pdf "Renditions: Constraints Imposed by Laws on Torture"], 8 September 2009; link from the United States [http://www.counterterrorismtraining.gov/leg/index.html Counter-Terrorism Training and Resources for Law Enforcement web site] {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121014042245/http://www.counterterrorismtraining.gov/leg/index.html |date=14 October 2012 }}</ref>

The [[Presidency of George W. Bush|Bush administration]] freely admitted to this practice; stating, among other provisions, that they have specifically asked that torture not be used. However, torture can still occur despite these provisions, and much documentation exists alleging that it has happened in many cases.<ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4502986.stm "Rendition: Tales of Torture"], BBC News Online, 7 December 2005. Retrieved 29 September 2008.</ref><ref name="italydidntknow" /><ref>[https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/mystery-surrounds-former-customs-agent-in-arar-case-1.678846 "Mystery surrounds former customs agent in Arar case"], CBC.CA</ref><ref name=wapo050906 /> In these instances, the initial captor allows the possibility of torture by releasing the prisoner into the custody of nations that practice torture.

The next distinction of degree is that of intent, where much of the search for evidence continues. It has been 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 torture would be a violation of US law.<ref name="MJC-2009-09-08" /> New York attorney Marc D. Falkoff stated that such evidence, i.e. transfer for the purposes of torture, was an operational practice. In a court filing, Falkoff described a classified prisoner transfer memo from [[Guantanamo Bay detention camp|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.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20120523063251/http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/access/938331331.html?dids=938331331:938331331&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:FT&type=current&date=Dec+8%2C+2005&author=Ken+Silverstein&pub=Los+Angeles+Times&edition=&startpage=A.10&desc=Pentagon+Memo+on+Torture-Motivated+Transfer+Cited%3B+A+court+filing+describes+a+classified+proposal+to+send+a+detainee+away+for+information+extraction. "Pentagon Memo on Torture-Motivated Transfer Cited"], ''Los Angeles Times'', 8 December 2005. Retrieved 29 September 2008.</ref>