A/HRC/4/41 page 93 General allegation 453. Information was submitted by NGOs to the Working Group concerning alleged obstacles encountered in the implementation of the Declaration by the Government of the United States of America (see paragraph 14). This information was transmitted to the Government. 454. According to the reports, since 11 September 2001, the Government of the United States has relied increasingly in its counter-terrorism operations on a practice that is known as “rendition”, or “extraordinary rendition”. The practice generally involves the detention of persons either outside or inside the United States and their extrajudicial transfer either to United States-run detention facilities overseas or to the custody of foreign intelligence agencies. Allegedly, even when suspects are transferred to the custody of foreign agents under the rendition programme, the United States Government often maintains a degree of control over their custody as well as the interrogation process itself. Because the persons subjected to this practice are generally held incommunicado in secret facilities, it is believed that the practice amounts to enforced disappearance. It is alleged that by authorizing United States agents to detain suspects and transfer them to incommunicado detention in overseas prisons, the United States violates express provisions of international law regarding the right to freedom from arbitrary arrest and detention, and the right to judicial review for the basis of the detention. 455. To date, victims of the rendition programme have not prevailed in their attempts to seek redress in United States courts. While United States courts have reportedly recognized the prohibitions against arbitrary detention, torture, other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and enforced disappearance as discrete violations of international law cognizable under the Alien Tort Statute and the Torture Victim Protection Act, so far lower courts have found that only foreign officials can be held civilly liable for violation of these norms. 456. In a communication dated 25 October 2006, the Government of the United States responded to the Working Group’s general allegation described above, which also contained a request made by NGOs for the United States Government to provide information relating to the policy and practice of rendition. The Government stated: “Inasmuch as this request concerns matters governed by the law of armed conflict, the United States respectfully notes that it does not believe that it falls within the mandate of the Working Group. As recently confirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, the law of armed conflict governs the armed conflict with al Qaeda. Specifically, the Supreme Court held that Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions applies to the armed conflict with al Qaeda. Nevertheless, as a matter of courtesy, the Government of the United States is pleased to provide the following materials relevant to its request, which can be found at the respective sites: − Speech of President George W. Bush dated September 6, 2006 (www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/09/20060906-3html);