Terrorism, Protecting Human Rights. 19 However, in the context of considering the effectiveness of torture-prevention strategies in the OSCE area certain significant developments are mentioned below. In the wake of a number of terrorist attacks in recent years, some counter-terrorism measures have been embraced that have not been in compliance with international human rights or refugee and humanitarian law. A number of these have, directly or indirectly, challenged the absolute prohibition in international law against torture and ill-treatment. The following practices have been reported in the media and shown to be conducive to the use of torture and ill-treatment in the context of counter-terrorism measures:         The use of secret or incommunicado detention, which can facilitate the use of torture, including the indefinite detention of terrorist suspects in several OSCE participating States and deprivation of their rights to due process and an effective remedy The transportation of terrorism suspects to countries that practice torture – sometimes transiting OSCE participating States – in violation of the principle of non-refoulement The official sanctioning of interrogation techniques or treatment amounting to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment The deportation or extradition of terrorist suspects to countries known to practice torture in conjunction with “diplomatic assurances” from the receiving government that the person will not be tortured or ill-treated on return The existence of special security forces operating outside of the normal legal framework The use of national security as a consideration to justify secrecy regarding exceptional measures taken with respect to detention, extraordinary rendition and harsh interrogation techniques The official position that the effective protection of the public from terrorism necessitates a dilution of international human rights law and domestic protections regarding torture The acceptance of the above-mentioned rationale by the general public, often on the basis of fear, leading to support for use of torture 20 The incorporation of such methods, which breach international human rights law, in counter-terrorism strategies not only risks diminishing the credibility of the international legal framework but can also exacerbate the problem. Any attempted Countering Terrorism, Protecting Human Rights: A Manual (Warsaw: Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, 2007), OSCE website, <http://www.osce.org/odihr/item_11_28294.html>. 20 In a poll of 27,000 people in 25 countries conducted for the BBC in 2006, nearly a third of those questioned thought the use of torture was acceptable under certain circumstances. Although a clear majority of respondents worldwide was found to be against the use of torture in all cases, the BBC report analysing the results concluded that “… countries that face political violence are more likely to accept the ideas that some degree of torture is permissible because of the extreme threat posed by terrorists.” “One-third support ‘some torture’”, BBC News Website, 19 October 2006, <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/6063386.stm#table>. 19 30