Executive Summary Torture is a barbaric act. I believe that no state whose regime conducts or condones torture can consider itself civilized. – Navi Pillay, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, June 26, 2009 International efforts to combat terrorism since the 9/11 attacks in the United States have done incalculable damage to the absolute prohibition on torture. The global ban on torture is a cornerstone of international law, binding on all nations in peace and at war, and no exceptions or justifications are permitted. The attack on the torture prohibition by the US government under President George W. Bush has rightly received widespread international condemnation, and has been formally repudiated by the Obama administration. Far less attention has been paid to the other side of the Atlantic, where leading European governments continue to flout their obligations to prevent and eradicate torture worldwide— and betray their declared values—through intelligence cooperation with countries that torture. France, Germany and the United Kingdom—pillars of the European Union and important allies in the fight against terrorism—demonstrate, through policy statements and practice, a willingness (even eagerness) to cooperate with foreign intelligence services in countries like Uzbekistan and Pakistan—notorious for abusive practices, both in general and against terrorism suspects in particular. They then use foreign torture information for intelligence and policing purposes. Regular receipt of, and reliance on, foreign torture information as the basis for operational decisions by the executive branch implicitly validates the use of unlawful methods to acquire information and is a breach of the positive obligation under international law to prevent and punish torture. Both the practice of using such information, and the issuing of public statements affirming the legitimacy of doing so, risks creating a market for torture intelligence. Foreign torture intelligence is used to identify terrorism suspects on national territory, launch police and surveillance operations and, in some cases, to initiate judicial investigations leading to arrests and prosecution. Information tainted by torture abroad can end up as part of legal proceedings, both in the form of evidence collected as a result of statements made 1 Human Rights Watch | June 2010