The Story of Maher Arar

RENDITION TO TORTURE

666 broadway new york ny 10012

t 212 614 6481 f 212 614 6499 www.ccr-ny.org
 Maher Arar: Rendition to Torture
Center for Constitutional Rights

In September 2002, as he was on his way home to Canada, Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) client Maher
Arar was sent by U.S. officials to be detained and interrogated under torture in Syria under a program known as
“extraordinary rendition.” Maher, a Canadian citizen of Syrian descent, was never charged with a crime, but he lost a
year of his life and carries the mental scars of his detention and torture around with him to this day. This is the story
of his nightmarish year of rendition, detention, and torture – and of Maher’s fight to achieve justice.

Table of Contents
Who is Maher Arar?......................................................................................................................................................2

Mr. Arar’s Detention in the United States……………………………………………………………………………………………….2

Mr. Arar’s Rendition to Syria………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….3

Mr. Arar’s Detention & Torture in Syria…………………………………………………………………………………………………..4

What is Rendition? ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………5

U.S. Legal Obligations Regarding Rendition………………………………………………………………………………………….5

Arar v. Ashcroft..……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………6

Legal Timeline………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………7

Canadian Inquiry Findings Related to Maher Arar…………………………………………………………...……………………9

Recommendations to the United States………………………………………………………………………………………………….9

1
 Maher Arar: Rendition to Torture
Center for Constitutional Rights

Who is Maher Arar?

This is who I am. I am a
father and a husband. I am a
telecommunications engineer
and entrepreneur. I have
never had trouble with the
police, and have always
been a good citizen. So I still
cannot believe what has
happened to me, and how
my life and career have been
destroyed.
— Maher Arar

Maher Arar is a Syrian-born Canadian citizen who moved to Canada with his parents when he was
17 years old. Because he left Syria at 17, he avoided doing mandatory military service there. After
attending McGill University and obtaining a Master’s degree in telecommunications, he moved to
Ottawa with his wife, Dr. Monia Mazigh, and young daughter Barâa.

In 1999, he started working for The MathWorks, Inc, a high-tech firm based in Boston, and then
returned to Ottawa in 2001 to start his own consulting company, while still working as a consultant
for The MathWorks, Inc. Maher and his wife had their second child, Houd, in February 2002.

Mr. Arar’s
Arar’s Detention in the United States
In 2002, Maher was living in Canada, where he had been a citizen since 1991, and worked as a
consultant with The MathWorks, Inc.

While in Tunisia with his wife and children, visiting his wife’s family in September 2002, Maher
received an email from The MathWorks saying they needed him to do some consulting work.
Leaving his family in Tunis, he returned to Canada on a flight that transited through New York.

On September 26, 2002, Maher’s flight arrived in New York at JFK airport at 2:00 p.m., where he
was supposed to catch his connecting flight to Montreal. At immigration, Maher gave his valid
Canadian passport to the immigration officer. After his name was entered into the computer, he was
pulled aside and taken to another area. This is when his nightmare began. Two hours later, he was
fingerprinted, photographed and his bags were searched. At this point, immigration officials told
Maher that this was regular procedure, but refused to answer his increasingly anxious questions
about what was happening. They did not let him make a phone call.

Officials from the New York Police Department and the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI)
arrived and began questioning him. Maher repeatedly asked for a lawyer, but was told that he had
no right to a lawyer because he was not a U.S. citizen. The officials promised that they would let

2
 Maher Arar: Rendition to Torture
Center for Constitutional Rights

him catch the next flight to Montreal once he answered their questions. Maher had nothing to hide,
so he cooperated with them. The officials interrogated Maher about everything - his work, his
salary, his travel in the U.S., as well as about an acquaintance of his, Abdullah Almalki. They swore
at him and insulted him. Maher told them everything he knew. He was then questioned by an INS
officer.

After these grueling interrogations that lasted until midnight, they chained Maher’s wrists and ankles,
and took him to a cell in a nearby building at JFK Airport. He was not provided with any food and
could not sleep as the lights were kept on all night. The next day, he was taken to the Metropolitan
Detention Center (MDC) in Brooklyn, where he was kept in solitary confinement. During his
detention at the MDC, he was shackled and interrogated. During one interrogation, an INS official
informed him that they would like him to “voluntarily” return to Syria, a country known for torture
and abuse of its prisoners; Maher repeated stated that he wanted to go home to Canada and that he
would be tortured if her were sent to Syria. He became increasingly worried that the U.S.
government planned to send him to Syria regardless of his concerns.

On October 1, 2002, Maher was given an INS-issued document stating that he was inadmissible into
the United States because he belonged to an organization designated as a “Foreign Terrorist
Organization,” namely, al Qaeda.

Two days later, on October 3, 2002, Maureen Girvan of the Canadian Consulate visited Maher at the
MDC. Maher expressed to her his fear that he might be removed to Syria, and Ms. Girvan assured
Maher that removal to Syria was not an option, as he was a Canadian citizen. The Canadian
government expected that the U.S. would return him to Canada. They did not.

It fact, it would be more than a year before Maher would set foot in Canada again.

Maher repeatedly asked for counsel, but his requests were denied. Finally, on October 5 he had a
short visit with a lawyer — nearly one week after he was detained. Even after his visit with an
attorney, he was interrogated without a lawyer being present, despite his repeated requests.

Mr. Arar’
Arar’s Rendition to Syria
After Maher met with the Canadian official and his lawyer, several federal officers interrogated him
regarding his opposition to removal to Syria. He protested that he wanted his lawyer and was told
that his lawyer refused to come. This interrogation lasted from 9pm on a Sunday night until 3am
Monday morning. Throughout the interrogation, Maher expressed grave concern that he would be
tortured if he were sent to Syria. Maher had not fulfilled his obligatory military service before he
emigrated from Syria. Based on both Syria’s well-known history of human rights abuses as well as
Maher’s own personal situation, he pled with U.S. officials not to send him to Syria. They ignored
his concerns.

At 4am on October 8, 2002, Maher was given his Final Notice of Inadmissibility informing him that,
based in part on classified information, INS Regional Director Defendant J. Scott Blackman had
ordered that he be removed, and the Commissioner of the INS had determined that his removal to
Syria was consistent with Article 3 of the United Nations Convention Against Torture. Maher was
taken from his cell to a private airport in New Jersey and was flown by private jet to Amman, Jordan
via Rome, Italy. He heard flight crew identify themselves as members of the “Special Removal

3
 Maher Arar: Rendition to Torture
Center for Constitutional Rights

Unit.” He was beaten in Amman and hours after arrival, was taken to Syria, where he spent the next
year in unspeakably horrific conditions.

Mr. Arar’
Arar’s Detention & Torture in Syria
In Syria, Maher spent more than 10 months in a grave- I describe my cell in Syria as a grave
like underground cell. During the first two weeks of because it was just three-
three-feet wide, six-
six-
detention, he was subject to intense beating and feet long, seven-
seven-feet high and unlit.
interrogated, and whipped with an electrical cable. He While I was there I sometimes felt onon
was regularly threatened with more torture, and forced the verge of death after beatings with
to hear others being tortured. He was forced to a black electrical cable about two
“confess” to having trained in Afghanistan, although he inches thick. They mostly aimed for my
has never been to Afghanistan. It is believed his palms but sometimes missed and hit my
interrogations were coordinated with U.S. officials, who wrists. Other times, I was left alone in a
supplied information and questions and received special “waiting room” within earshot
reports from the Syrians on Maher’s responses. of others' screams. At the end of the
day, they would tell me that tomorrow
On October 5, 2003, Syria released Maher without filing would be worse. In those ten-
ten-and-
and-a-
any charges. After a year of torture and investigation, half months I lost about 40 pounds. I
the Syrian Ambassador to the U.S., Imad Moustapha, never saw, but only heard, the agony
said, “We did our investigations. We traced links. We of my fellow prisoners. I was so
traced relations. We tried to find anything. We scared I urinated on myself twice.
couldn’t.”
I agreed to sign any document
document they
The Syrian security officials released Maher into the put before me, even those I wasn't
custody of Canadian Embassy officials in Damascus, allowed to read. And eventually I
Syria. That night, the Canadian Consulate flew Maher to would say anything at all to avoid
Ottawa where, after being held for a year at the request more torture. “Do you want me to use
of U.S. authorities in a grave-like cell, and tortured that?” someone would ask when I
without access to an attorney or any recourse to didn't answer soon enough, pointing
challenge his detention, Maher was finally free and to a steel chair in the corner of the
the
reunited with his wife and children. interrogation room.

Since his release, Maher and his wife Monia, who No, I told them, I did not want them to
worked tirelessly on his behalf during the time Maher use that. And yes, I told them, I had
was imprisoned to get him released, have fought to been to Afghanistan. It wasn't true, but
clear his name and hold those who rendered him to it seemed important enough to my
Syria accountable. jailers. After a month, broken
physically and mentally, I was also
Numerous major revelations have since come to light. instructed to write these things down
According to testimony at Canadian hearings, Maher on a piece of paper next to other
was never wanted for any crime in Canada, nor was he answers to other questions that they
ever even a suspect in a crime. Indeed, Maher has never had gone ahead and penned on my
been charged with any crime in any country. behalf.
-- Maher Arar, on his detention in Syria
The Center for Constitutional Rights, which began working with Maher’s family before his release, brought his case
after he arrived home. CCR, together with the law-firm DLA Piper, continues to represent Maher in his civil case
against the U.S. government – Arar v. Ashcroft – so that Maher may finally receive some small measure of justice for
his rendition to torture at the hands of the U.S.

4
 Maher Arar: Rendition to Torture
Center for Constitutional Rights

What is Rendition?
Extraordinary rendition is the forced transfer of a person “Rendition, as currently practiced,
from one country to another for arbitrary detention and is undermining our moral credibility
interrogation under torture. Since September 11, 2001, the and standing abroad and
Bush administration has used extraordinary rendition to weakening the coalitions with
covertly transport an estimated 150 persons—and possibly foreign governments that we need
more—for detention and interrogation without judicial to effectively combat international
oversight as part of the so-called “war on terror.” Victims of terrorism.”
extraordinary rendition are sent to countries where torture is -Senator Joe Biden.
Biden. July 26, 2007
routinely practiced on detainees.

U.S. legal obligations regarding rendition

United Nations Convention against Torture (ratified by the U.S. in 1994), Article 3:
1. No State Party shall expel, return (“refouler”) or extradite a person to another State where
there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to
torture.
2. For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities
shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence
in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human
rights.

The Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 is domestic legislations which
requires that the U.S. to comply with CAT Article 3 and take extra measures to prevent the
involuntary return, removal or extradition of a person to a country where he or she fears torture.

International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (ratified by the US in 1992) Article 7:
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or
scientific experimentation.

Torture Act 2000, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2340, 2340A

2340. Definitions
As used in this chapter—
(1) ``torture'' means an act committed by a person acting under the color of law specifically
intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering (other than pain or suffering
incidental to lawful sanctions) upon another person within his custody or physical control;
(2) ``severe mental pain or suffering'' means the prolonged mental harm caused by or resulting from—
(A) the intentional infliction or threatened infliction of severe physical pain or suffering;
(B) the administration or application, or threatened administration or application, of mind-
altering substances or other procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the
personality;
(C) the threat of imminent death; or

5
 Maher Arar: Rendition to Torture
Center for Constitutional Rights

(D) the threat that another person will imminently be subjected to death, severe physical
pain or suffering, or the administration or application of mind-altering substances or other
procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or personality; […]
2340A. Torture
(a) Offense.— Whoever outside the United States commits or attempts to commit torture shall
be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both, and if death results to
any person from conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be punished by death or
imprisoned for any term of years or for life. […]
(c) Conspiracy.— A person who conspires to commit an offense under this section shall be
subject to the same penalties (other than the penalty of death) as the penalties prescribed for the
offense, the commission of which was the object of the conspiracy.

“There are international covenants against torture. The submission of rendition is something that is
going to have to come under some judicial supervision…. I believe [Arar] is a very compelling case
that there needs to be judicial intervention
intervention or needs to be a lot more oversight than there has been
on these matters.”
-Senator Arlen Specter,
Specter, March 7, 2007

Arar v Ashcroft
CCR, with the law-firm DLA Piper, represents Maher Arar in a case against the U.S. officials
responsible for sending him to Syria to be interrogated under torture, including former Attorney
General John Ashcroft, former Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson, FBI Director Robert
Mueller, and other U.S. immigration officials.

Maher brought claims under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution for being sent to Syria
for arbitrary detention and torture, as well as for being denied access to counsel and the courts and
his inhumane conditions of confinement in the U.S. He also brought a claim under the Torture
Victim Protection Act (TVPA) for being subjected to torture under color of law of Syria. He seeks a
jury trial, damages and declaratory relief. The first count alleges that by sending Arar to Syria to be
tortured, Defendants are liable under the TVPA for conspiring with Syrian officials to subject him to
torture under color of foreign law. The second count alleges that Defendants violated Mr. Arar’s
substantive due process rights under the Fifth Amendment by transporting him to Syria so that he
would be tortured and coercively interrogated there. The third count alleges that Defendants
violated Mr. Arar’s substantive due process rights by transporting him to Syria to be arbitrarily
detained there. The fourth count alleges that Defendants’ inhumane treatment of Mr. Arar while he
was detained in the United States, as well as their preventing his access to counsel and the courts,
including by lying to him and his attorney, further violated his substantive due process rights.

On February 16, 2006, Judge David G. Trager of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
New York dismissed Maher’s claims. The District Court dismissed Mr. Arar’s TVPA count on the
ground that the Act does not protect non-U.S. citizens, and because it found that the U.S. officials,
even though alleged to have conspired with Syrians officials to have Mr. Arar tortured in Syria, were
not acting under color of foreign law unless they were acting at the behest of Syrian officials, and
therefore the Act was not applicable. The District Court found that even assuming that Mr. Arar
was entitled to Fifth Amendment substantive due process protection under the U.S. Constitution,

6
 Maher Arar: Rendition to Torture
Center for Constitutional Rights

the Defendants could not be liable for sending him to Syria to be tortured and arbitrarily detained
because national-security and foreign policy concerns foreclose a damages remedy. After rejecting
Defendants’ argument that Mr. Arar was not entitled to Constitutional protection because he had
not “entered” the United States, the District Court required Mr. Arar to re-plead his Fifth
Amendment substantive due process claims to better allege that he was subjected to gross physical
abuse in the U.S., what injury the denial of access to counsel prevented him from grieving, and that
Defendants were personally involved. Finally, the District Court found that Maher did not have
standing to seek declaratory relief against the U.S. officials because he does not continue to suffer an
ongoing harm which such relief would redress.

On December 12, 2006, CCR filed its appeal brief in the Second Circuit, seeking to have the all
claims reinstated. Oral argument is scheduled for November 9, 2007.

“Maher Arar was the victim of the Bush Administration's program of 'extraordinary rendition.' This is a
disgusting practice that brings dishonor to the United States of America, and ultimately endangers our
troops in the field by validating the use of torture all over the world. We must know the truth of what
happened to Maher Arar, why it happened,
happened, upon whose orders, and upon what justification.”
-Representative Edward Markey,
Markey, September 20, 2006

Legal time line

January 22, 2004 The Center for Constitutional Rights filed suit, on behalf of Mr. Arar, in the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of New York against Attorney General
John Ashcroft, former Deputy Attorney General Larry D. Thompson, and FBI
Director Robert Mueller, as well as numerous directors of the U.S. immigration
officials.
September 27- Defendants file motions to dismiss the case.
October 4, 2004
January 14, 2005 Mr. Arar’s opposition to the motion to dismiss motions is filed.
January 18, 2005 The U.S. government moved to dismiss the case by asserting the “state secrets”
privilege, claiming that the reason Mr. Arar was deemed a member of al-Qaeda
and sent to Syria, instead of Canada, are ”state secrets.” The government argued
that litigating the would reveal intelligence gathering methods and harm national
security and foreign relations.
March 15, 2005 CCR filed a response to the US government’s “state secrets” motion, arguing
that Mr. Arar could prove his case without privileged information, and even if
such information were necessary to establish a defense, procedural safeguards
could protect such information.
February 16, 2006 Judge David G. Trager of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
New York dismissed Mr. Arar's claims against U.S. government officials for
“rendering” him to Syria to be tortured and arbitrarily detained. In so doing,
Judge Trager found, inter alia, that national security and foreign policy
considerations prevented him from holding the officials liable for carrying out
an extraordinary rendition even if such conduct violates our treaty obligations or
customary international law. He declined to rule on the “state secrets” motion at
that time.

7
 Maher Arar: Rendition to Torture
Center for Constitutional Rights

August 17, 2006 Final judgment was entered, after Mr. Arar declined to re-plead his domestic
detention claim, opting instead to proceed with the allegations contained in the
complaint.
September 12, 2006 Mr. Arar's notice of appeal was filed in the Second Circuit.
September 18, 2006 The Canadian Commission of Inquiry established by the Canadian Government
to Investigate the Actions of Canadian Officials in Relation to Mr. Arar issued
its report. The Commissioner concluded "categorically that there is no evidence
to indicate that Mr. Arar has committed any offence or that his activities
constitute a threat to the security of Canada." Canadian investigators, with U.S.
cooperation, exhaustively investigated Mr. Arar, and found no information that
could implicate Mr. Arar in terrorist activities. The Commission also found no
evidence that Canadian officials acquiesced in the U.S. decision to detain and
remove Mr. Arar to Syria, but that it is very likely that the U.S. relied on
inaccurate and unfair information about Mr. Arar that was provided by Canadian
officials.
December 12, 2006 Mr. Arar’s opening appeal brief is filed in the Second Circuit.
December 21, 2006 U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said that the U.S. would re-examine
Mr. Arar’s placement on the U.S. government’s watch list.
January 22, 2007 The Department of Justice publicly released a week-old letter to Canda’s
Minister of Public Safety, Stockwell Day, claiming that the U.S. still had reason
to keep Mr. Arar on the government watch list. The letter, signed by Attorney
General Alberto Gonzales and Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff
also offered to share “U.S. derived” information with the Canadians in a
confidential meeting. The release of the letter came four days after Minister Day
had examined all the U.S.-held information and declared that such information
“has not altered our opinion on this at all.”
January 26, 2007 Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the RCMP Commissioner
apologized to Mr. Arar and his family. Prime Minister Harper also announced
that the government had agreed to compensate Mr. Arar in the amount of
approximately $10 million.
February 22, 2007 Defendants file their response to Mr. Arar’s opening appellate brief.
April 19, 2007 Mr. Arar's reply brief is filed before the Second Circuit.
August 9, 2007 The Canadian government released new information regarding Mr. Arar’s
rendition. In response to a court order, the government released some portions
of a report that it had previously redacted due to “national security” concerns.
The unredacted portions showed that the CIA was involved in Mr. Arar's
detention starting at least when he was detained in New York and had been in
contact with Canadian officials during that time. They also revealed that in mid-
2002, Canadian investigators were not able to convince the FBI to institute a
criminal investigation of the subjects of their investigation, much less Mr. Arar,
who had been identified as a potential witness.
November 9, 2007 Oral argument in Arar v. Ashcroft is scheduled before the Second Circuit.

8
 Maher Arar: Rendition to Torture
Center for Constitutional Rights

Canadian Inquiry Findings Related to Maher Arar

Upon Mr. Arar’s release and in response to public pressure, the Canadian government launched an
extensive public Commission of Inquiry to investigate the responsibility of Canadian officials in his
rendition to Syria. After reviewing over 20,000 government documents and taking testimony from
over 70 government witnesses, the Commission released a 1,200 page report in September 2006.
The Commission concluded:

1. There is “no evidence” indicating the Mr. Arar committed any offense or implicating him in
terrorist activity.
2. There is no evidence that Canadian officials participated in the U.S. decision to detain Mr.
Arar and send him to Syria.
3. The U.S. decision to detain Mr. Arar very likely relied on inaccurate and unfair information
about Mr. Arar that had been provided by Canadian officials.
4. Canadian officials had not acted quickly enough to get Mr. Arar out of Syria and leaked false
information which tarnished Mr. Arar’s reputation upon his return.
Justice O’Connor, who headed the Commission, stated: “Canadian investigators made extensive efforts to
find any information that could implicate Mr. Arar in terrorist activities. They did so over a lengthy period of time,
even after Mr. Arar’s case became a cause célèbre. The results speak for themselves: they found none.”

In January 2007, the Canadian government settled Mr. Arar’s civil case in Canada, apologizing to
him and paying him nearly $10 million. Prime Minister Harper of Canada and the Commissioner of
the Royal Canadian Mounted Police apologized to Maher Arar and his family for the "terrible
ordeal" they suffered. He has also called on the US to “come clean” and acknowledge “the
deficiencies and inappropriate conduct that occurred in this case.”

Recommendations to the United States

While the Canadian government has found that Mr. Arar is indeed innocent and cleared his name,
and determined that his civil and human rights were grossly violated, the Bush Administration
refused to cooperate with the Canadian Inquiry, and continues to insist that Mr. Arar belongs on the
“no-fly” watch list, while fighting to have Mr. Arar’s lawsuit dismissed.

Recommendations:
1. Make an official, public apology to Maher Arar.
2. Launch an independent commission to investigate Maher Arar’s rendition.
3. Demand that the Administration disclose what it did to Maher Arar and why, including
releasing all documents.
4. Demand that Maher Arar be removed from the Watch List immediately.

“The Bush Administration

Administration refuses to acknowledge any responsibility, instead offering tepid
explanation that Syrian officials assured the U.S. that Arar would not be tortured. These are the same
Syrian officials with whom our government now says it will not negotiate because they are not
trustworthy. Mr. Arar’s cases stands as a sad symbol of the of how we have been too willing to
sacrifice our core principles to overarching government power in the name of security, when doing
so only undermines the principles we stand for and
and makes us less safe.”
- Senator Patrick Leahy,
Leahy, Time Magazine