success of the U.S. military’s rehabilitation and reintegration program. 170 Documents released through an April 2013 ACLU FOIA request reveal that DOD described the recidivism rate of detainees released from what was then the BTIF were “relatively low.” 171 Upon release, detainees interviewed by JPP are more pre-occupied with resettling and reintegrating into normal life than taking up arms against the United States. 172 Many face significant social stigma, difficulties finding jobs, and lasting mental and physical health issues. 173 Overemphasis on a very small percentage that have re-engaged in hostilities against the United States gives a false impression of the actual threat posed by repatriated and released detainees, undermining the accuracy of U.S. threat assessments and fuelling politicized narratives in the U.S. public and Congress that unnecessarily and unjustly prolong detention. 174 2. Flaws in Review Process and Balancing the Costs of Continuing Indefinite Detention Flaws in U.S. capture practices and detention review regime may undermine the accuracy of threat assessments, and lead to a biased picture of a detainee’s propensity to turn to or re-engage in militancy or terrorism. The United States must also consider the serious legal, political and moral costs of continuing to hold detainees at the DFIP. The U.S. practice of paying bounties—particularly in the earlier years of the war—as well as the widely reported practice of individuals providing false information to U.S. forces because of tribal rivalries or personal enmities has led to the wrongful detention of many individuals, both in Afghanistan and at Guantanamo Bay. 175 Relatives of current Pakistani detainees allege that similar 170 Ibid. Department of Defense, “Report on progress toward security and stability in Afghanistan”, December 2012, http://www.defense.gov/news/1230_Report_final.pdf, p. 40. 171 Department of Defense memorandums released through ACLU FOIA request, http://www.aclu.org/files/pdfs/natsec/bagram20130418/Unlawful%20Enemy%20Combatant%20Review%20B oard%20Procedures.pdf, p. 1. 172 Justice Project Pakistan interviews and conversations with ex-detainees (names, dates, locations withheld) 173 Ibid.; University of Berkeley, “Returning home”, ps. 3-7. 174 Carol Rosenberg, “Congress, rules keep Obama from closing Guantanamo Bay”, McClathy, 9 January, 2012, http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/01/09/135179/congress-rule-keep-obama-from.html#.Ua19fNL-F1w; “US still lacks Guantanamo transfer safeguards: Lawmakers”, The Express Tribune, 9 February, 2012, http://tribune.com.pk/story/333887/us-still-lacks-guantanamo-transfer-safeguards-lawmakers/ 175 “Human Rights Watch 2006 World Report Chapter on Pakistan”, http://www.hrw.org/world-report2007/pakistan; Tom Malinowski, “Who’s really locked up in Guantanamo”, 16 March, 2006, http://www.hrw.org/news/2006/03/15/whos-really-locked-guantanamo; Mona Samari, “Bounties paid for terror suspects”, Human Rights Defender, 16 January, 2007, http://www.amnesty.org.au/hrs/comments/2167/; Ann Wright, “More bounties in Afghanistan and Pakistan will result in detention of innocent civilians”, Common Dreams, 1 October, 2007, https://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/10/01/4241; Jennifer Daskal, “How to close Guantanamo”, 04 January, 2008, http://www.hrw.org/news/2008/01/03/how-close-guantanamo; Mark Pope, “How did so many innocent people end up in Guantanamo Bay?”, Reprieve, 30 August, 2012, http://www.reprieve.org.uk/publiceducation/2012_08_30_Public_Education_Innocents_Guantanamo/; Mark Denbeaux & Joshua Denbeaux, “Report on Guantanamo detainees: a profile of 517 detainees through analysis of Department of Defense data”, Seton Hall University Law School, http://law.shu.edu/publications/guantanamoReports/guantanamo_report_final_2_08_06.pdf, p.15. The U.S. military has acknowledged that false information provided on the basis of personal enmity has been a problem in detention operations in Afghanistan. See Ray Rivera, “In an Afghan village, living in fear of both sides”, The New York Times, 23 April, 2011, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/24/world/asia/24paktika.html?pagewanted=all; Human Rights First, 44