From Cooperation, to Complicity, to Compensation: The War on Terror, Extraordinary Rendition, and the Cost of Torture
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Attention has turned recently to the human rights implications of Western states' cooperation with the United States in the so-called War on Terror. This paper presents the ordeal of Canadian Maher Arar as a case-study in how one state responded to contentions of complicity in the extraordinary rendition of one of its nationals. Relying in part on faulty intelligence supplied by Canada, Arar was rendered by the United States to Syria. He was imprisoned and tortured for almost a year before Canada secured his release. Under considerable public pressure, the Canadian government appointed an independent public inquiry to examine the events surrounding his rendition. Following the release of the report and its recommendations, the Canadian government formally apologized to Arar and paid him substantial compensation. The author provides an account of the function performed by independent public inquiries in responding to public calls for government accountability in face of alleged wrongdoing. The paper describes the challenge posed by competing demands for publicity and secrecy in the particular context of controversial actions taken in the name of national security. Finally the author considers the precedential value of the Arar Inquiry for other jurisdictions that face similar allegations regarding complicity in human rights violations, as well as the task of devising a fair and reasonably open process against claims of national security confidentiality.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it