A/HRC/27/48 Group’s methods of work pertaining to the preparation and organization of, and follow-up to, its country visits. The Working Group intends to share the terms of reference with the Coordination Committee of Special Procedures for its consideration and to make them publicly available on the Working Group’s web page. It is hoped that the terms of reference will enhance the transparency, visibility and understanding of the Working Group’s country visits. C. Follow-up to the joint study on secret detention 60. The Working Group has considered how it can contribute to the follow-up of the joint study on secret detention (A/HRC/13/42) within its mandate and will continue that consideration in 2014. It has discussed that with the current holders of other special mandates taking part in the joint study or otherwise having an interest in it or the follow-up. The Working Group will also address the follow-up to its own previous reports and opinions on detention and antiterrorism measures, taking account of subsequent developments, including the length of detention of individuals subject to indeterminate detention regimes. D. Prevention of imminent arbitrary deprivation of liberty 61. The Working Group has continued its deliberations in situations where an individual is at risk of being arrested on an arrest warrant or detention order being issued against him or her and where the resulting deprivation of liberty is likely to be arbitrary in nature. 62. Under the Working Group’s current methods of work, there is no mechanism addressing situations where there is sufficiently reliable information that the execution of an order of arrest will result in arbitrary depravation of liberty. In effect, the Working Group currently has to wait until the arrest warrant is executed and the person is arbitrarily detained. 63. A mechanism might be applicable in situations when an individual is to be arrested solely because he or she has exercised the fundamental rights or freedoms guaranteed by international human rights law. Similarly, it could apply in situations where an imminent arrest would constitute a violation of international law prohibiting discrimination based on national or ethnic origin, religion, political or other opinion, gender, sexual orientation or other status, and which might result in the equality of human rights being ignored. 64. If such a preventive mechanism was available to the Working Group, then section V of its methods of work (urgent action procedure) would apply mutatis mutandis to the consideration of communications on imminent arbitrary deprivation of liberty. 65. As to action on communications in that category, two options can be considered: (a) if the Working Group considered that the imminent detention was not of an arbitrary nature, it would render an opinion to that effect, such an opinion not prejudging any further consideration by the Working Group of a communication in the case on other grounds provided for in its methods of work; (b) if the Working Group considered that the arbitrary nature of the imminent detention had been established, it would render an opinion to that effect and make recommendations to the Government. 19