17 57. Very recently, on July 6, 2006, the European Parliament adopted a resolution on “the alleged use of European countries by the CIA for the transportation and illegal detention of prisoners.”59 In its extensive resolution, the European Parliament began by affirming that: “The fight against terrorism cannot be won by sacrificing the very principles that terrorism seeks to destroy, notably that the protection of fundamental rights must never be compromised; […] terrorism must be fought by legal means and it must be defeated while respecting international and national law.”60 It then states that the practices of “secret detention” and the abduction of suspects in the territory of the States members involve the State’s international responsibility (paras. 2 and 8). It expresses its profound concern owing to the use of European airspace and airports for suspects to “be transferred illegally to the custody of the CIA or the US military or to other countries” (para. 13). 58. The said Resolution “condemns the practice of extraordinary renditions, which is aimed at ensuring that suspects are not brought before a court but are transferred to third countries to be interrogated, where they could be tortured, and detained in facilities controlled by the USA or local authorities.” The Resolution also “considers unacceptable the practices of certain governments consisting in limiting their responsibilities by asking for diplomatic assurances from countries in respect of which there is strong reason to believe they practice torture” (para. 10). And, in continuation the same Resolution: “Stresses that the prohibition of torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment as defined in Article 1 of the U.N. Convention against Torture, is absolute and allows no exceptions whether in times of war or threat of war, domestic political instability or any other emergency; recalls that cases of incommunicado detention, abduction or extraordinary rendition constitute violations of fundamental rights in International Law, in particular Articles 3 and 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, especially since these acts are synonymous with torture or inhuman and degrading treatment” (para. 29)61. 59. Condor redivivus! Its atrocious and inhuman methods and practices continue to be applied, in a different context, today! When will humanity learn from the lessons of the past, from the terrible suffering of previous generations? If it has not learned yet, perhaps it will never learn. When will human beings cease to dehumanize their fellow human beings? If they have not ceased to do so today, perhaps they will never cease to do so. And they will continue to co-exist with evil, and submit to it. This is why the struggle for the primacy of the recta ratio62 has not ended, as in the myth of Sisyphus. 59 . European Parliament, doc. A6-0213/2006, pp. 1-6. 60 . Preamble, considerandum C. 61 . In addition to this Resolution of the European Parliament, the Secretary General of the Council of Europe presented recommendations – in light of article 52 of the European Convention on Human Rights – in his recent Reports to the Government of the European States, on news that suggested that “individuals, notably persons suspected of involvement in acts of terrorism, may have been arrested and detained, or transported while deprived of their liberty, by or at the instigation of foreign agencies, with the active or passive co-operation of States Parties to the Convention or by States Parties themselves at their own initiative, without such deprivation of liberty having been acknowledged”; cf. Council of Europe, doc. SG/Inf(2006)5, of February 28, 2006, pp. 1-15; Council of Europe, doc. SG/Inf(2006)13, of June 14, 2006, pp. 1-8. 62 . Cf., in this regard A.A. Cançado Trindade, A Humanização do Direito Internacional, Belo Horizonte/Brazil, Edit. Del Rey, 2006, pp. 3-106 and 385-409.