A/HRC/35/8 human rights law, including violence against women, gender-based violence and violence against children; (iii) Extent to which the type and quantity of arms that are the subject of the proposed export are commensurate with the intended use stated by the recipient State. 40. In order to be effective, a human rights risk assessment must be based on the objective, non-discriminatory, verifiable and systematic collection of accurate and reliable information. A wide array of sources may be needed to build a comprehensive understanding of the immediate and long-term human rights risks associated with a proposed export. In addition to information that can be requested from the recipient State under article 8 of the Arms Trade Treaty, sources of information relevant for the application of human rights criteria for arms transfer decisions may include documentation from: (a) United Nations human rights bodies, including the Human Rights Council, its universal periodic review mechanism and the special procedure mandate holders, the human rights treaty bodies, the United Nations commissions of inquiry and fact-finding missions; (b) OHCHR; (c) Other relevant United Nations organs (such as the Security Council), programmes and funds (including UNDP, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the United Nations Children’s Fund), the International Court of Justice and ad hoc courts and tribunals; (d) The International Criminal Court; (e) Regional human rights bodies; (f) The secretariat of the Arms Trade Treaty; (g) International and national non-governmental organizations, research institutes and think tanks with expertise in international human rights law, international humanitarian law and the arms trade; (h) National diplomatic missions; (i) National human rights institutions, sources of military doctrine, manuals and instructions of the recipient State; (j) International and national media outlets. 41. All human rights risk assessments should be conducted on a case-by-case basis, taking account of the gender dimension of arms transfers and the potential or actual use of the transferred arms. They should integrate a forward-looking approach that looks at both the past and present human rights record of the recipient State and at the anticipated risks to the level of enjoyment of all human rights. A forward-looking assessment would also take into account the potential impact of the “long shelf-life of much military equipment”.61 It should, therefore, consider: (a) the durability of the arms subject to export authorization, as arms often outlast political regimes and can be used in unintended or unforeseen ways over the long term; (b) cyclical patterns that may signal a return to heightened risks of disturbance and human rights violations or abuses, even if the situation has recently stabilized; and (c) any events or circumstances that, even if seemingly unrelated to human rights violations, may result in a deterioration of the human rights situation. 62 VI. Conclusions and recommendations 42. Arms transfers and the potential or actual use of transferred arms may have a direct or indirect, positive or negative, impact on the enjoyment of civil, political, 61 62 Control Arms, ATT Monitor Report 2016, p. 62. See the contribution of Saferworld. 13