the DRB to provide testimony — all of which could get delayed or cancelled without notice or adequate explanation; and finally, to receive news of their loved one’s prospective release. While it was broadly known in the country that Pakistani citizens were going missing, JPP came to know of specific, identified detainees in need of representation through the British law and justice advocacy organization, Reprieve.18 As documented in the 2015 report, the DRB denied detainees the right to legal representation, and did not provide any information about why they were being held, what they were charged with, or how long they would be detained19 — all a violation of habeas corpus.20 The administering of such indeterminacy was a deliberate technique of torment, and came to mark the lives of both detainees and their families for the length of their separation. Detainees were not permitted visitors, though the ICRC arranged intermittent communication with their families by phone, video, and written letters — all of which were heavily censored. Detainees reported not being allowed to divulge details of their abduction or treatment in jail under the everlooming threat of contact being severed completely. While TCN cases would be reviewed every six months,21 detainees and families did not know if their hearings would take place, or if something was required of them. Expecting a call from the DRB, Hanif Ali’s family, for example, had prepared and gathered to provide testimony, only to learn it had been cancelled as another call had run overtime. A few days later, his father received a call with no advance notice and had to provide testimony immediately and alone, and without the support of legal representation (see page 56). All of the Pakistanis held there were detained without charge while the DRB process determined whether they were to be charged; and this interrogation could go on indefinitely, further reducing their lives to a process of waiting. Guessing As JPP’s legal team was prevented from meeting or speaking to their clients and collecting firsthand accounts of their capture and detainment, investigations therefore began with the detainees’ families. This report shows that the information collected was often about what families thought could have happened to their loved ones, as they tried to make sense of loss and longing. It was only after repatriation that JPP collected first-hand accounts from detainees and attempted to assemble a clearer understanding of the puzzling events that led to the disappearance of Pakistani citizens. Between detainees and their families, then, their recollections and details vary from competing to disparate accounts. Due to the sudden abductions, families could only narrate what they believed most likely led to their loved ones crossing the border, and falling into the hands of  https://reprieve.org.uk/  This is known as incommunicado detention. 20  Habeas corpus refers to an individual’s right to appear before a court, in order to secure release from arrest, unless it is determined that they have committed an unlawful act, and their arrest is lawful. @Matteen Law Resources and Legal Consultancy. “Explaining Habeas Corpus Writ Petition Along With Case Laws.” May 10, 2018. http://atmateen.com/ habeas-corpus-writ-petition/ 21  Belhadi, Omran. Closing Bagram: The Other Guantanamo. JPP. 2015. 18 19 8