5cjxburmr

The obligation to release detainees in a safe and orderly manner, as well as operationalnecessities (e.g., force protection) and logistical constraints (e.g., the limited availability oftransport), may make it difficult to release a detainee at the precise moment that thecircumstances justifying detention cease. 107 Continued detention in order to facilitate a safe andorderly release may be necessary. 1088.14.4 Transfers of Detainees. Because the transfer of a detainee from U.S. custody toanother entity or State may implicate certain U.S. legal obligations or policies, detainees shouldnot be transferred to another State or entity without proper authorization. 1098.14.4.1 U.S. Policy Prohibiting Transfers in Cases in Which Detainees WouldLikely Be Tortured. U.S. policy provides that no person shall be transferred to another State if itis more likely than not that the person would be tortured in the receiving country, regardless ofwhether the person is physically present in the United States or whether such transfer wouldotherwise be consistent with applicable law. 1108.15 NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR DETENTIONA proper accounting of detainees is an important part of a State’s implementation of therequirements of humane treatment.detainee is not to be released in a location where the conditions are such that the detainee may be threatened orattacked by hostile or malign elements upon release.”).107 See Chairman’s Commentary to the Copenhagen Process: Principles and Guidelines 4.8 (“It is difficult toprovide a precise time limit to indicate how soon a detainee should be released after the circumstances justifyingdetention have ceased to exist. Operational necessities, such as force protection, the safety of a detainee, or thelimited availability of transport sometimes make it difficult to release a detainee at the precise moment that thecircumstances justifying detention cease.”).108 Compare § 9.37.3 (Without Delay).109 For example, DOD DIRECTIVE 2310.01E, DoD Detainee Program, 3m (Aug. 19, 2014) (“No detainee will bereleased, repatriated, or transferred out of DoD custody or control except in accordance with applicable law,regulation, policy, and other issuances.”); DOD DIRECTIVE 2310.01E, The Department of Defense DetaineeProgram, 4.6 (Sept. 5, 2006) (“No detainee shall be released or transferred from the care, custody, or control of aDoD Component except in accordance with applicable law, regulation, policy, and other issuances.”).110 See, e.g., Munaf v. Geren, 553 U.S. 674, 702 (2008) (“Indeed, the Solicitor General states that it is the policy ofthe United States not to transfer an individual in circumstances where torture is likely to result.”); PUBLIC LAW 105-277, § 2242(a) (Oct. 21, 1998), codified at 8 U.S.C. § 1231 note (“It shall be the policy of the United States not toexpel, extradite, or otherwise effect the involuntary return of any person to a country in which there are substantialgrounds for believing the person would be in danger of being subjected to torture, regardless of whether the personis physically present in the United States.”). One of the formal understandings of the United States made uponratification of the Convention Against Torture provided that “the United States understands the phrase, ‘where thereare substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture,’ as used in article 3 ofthe Convention, to mean ‘if it is more likely than not that he would be tortured.’” United States, Statement onRatification of the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,Dec. 10, 1984, Oct. 21, 1994, 1830 UNTS 320, 322.506