governed by the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions, customary international law, including Article 75 of API and international human rights law, from the date of apprehension to the end of the international armed conflict. For those apprehended in connection with the subsequent non-international armed conflict in Afghanistan, detention is regulated by Common Article 3, customary international law, international human rights law, domestic law and other relevant bodies of law. 15. Detainees captured in connection with the international conflict in Afghanistan should have been charged or released once the active hostilities in that conflict ceased. To date, only 30 Guantánamo detainees have been charged, and the charges against 15 of them were dropped without prejudice. Hundreds of detainees held in Guantánamo were apprehended after the end of that conflict in June 2002. Of the 116 persons still held at Guantánamo, only 26 were captured in Afghanistan before this date. Reports also indicate that over 90 per cent of all detainees were not captured by US or coalition forces but in exchange of bounties, thus raising numerous questions about the basis for their capture and subsequent detention. 16. The continued detention of all individuals apprehended prior to July 2002 amounts to more than 13 years of detention following the end of the international armed conflict in Afghanistan. This delay of 13 years after the end of the conflict is “unjustifiable” and the continued detention without charge of individuals arrested in this international armed conflict violates the prohibition of arbitrary detention. 17. Reasons for detention. Based on credible reports and interviews with former detainees, it appears that the United States may have violated international standards by detaining individuals for the sole purpose of gathering intelligence and by failing to inform detainees about the reasons for their detention. 18. Continued and indefinite detention at Guantánamo. Thirty detainees are currently recommended for “continued detention under the Authorization for Use of Military Force”. Moreover, 54 out of 116 individuals detained at Guantánamo as of 31 August 2015 have been cleared for transfer or release. The majority of them have been cleared for transfer or release for over five years. In other words, US authorities determined that these individuals no longer pose a threat to US national security that cannot be mitigated, yet they remain in indefinite detention, uncertain as to whether they will ever be released. Indefinite detention is a per se violation of the CAT, even more so when it adversely impacted the health of the detainees. 19. Judicial review of lawfulness of detention. From 2002 to 2008, the United States did not provide the Guantánamo detainees with an effective access to an independent court to challenge the legality of their detention, in contravention of international human rights law. While administrative reviews of the lawfulness of the detention have existed, they have not offered the necessary guarantees of independence and impartiality required in the context of armed conflicts, thus placing the United States in violation with international humanitarian law. In 2008, the US Supreme Court ruled in Boumediene v. Bush that Guantánamo detainees had a constitutional right to writs of habeas corpus. In recent years, 10