A/HRC/21/43 ensure that the company’s personnel have been trained in the protection tasks that they will perform, applicable national and international law and other key areas, including fundamental rights, protection of personality and procedural law, conduct to be adopted with persons resisting or behaving violently, first aid, assessment of damage to health resulting from the use of force, and combating corruption. The Swiss draft law grants an exception to these standards if no company satisfying them is available and the protection task cannot be completed otherwise, but stipulates a maximum duration of six months for such contracts. 50. The Swiss draft law explicitly sets out the conditions necessary to authorize the use of arms by private security companies. Such companies may use arms only to execute a protection task or react in a situation of legitimate defence or state of need. In contracts with federal authorities, the use of arms must be stipulated. 51. Sections 19 to 21 set out specific sanctions, including fines and imprisonment, for violations, including serious violations of human rights. Public consultation on the Swiss draft law concluded on 31 January 2012 and a redrafting process to reflect comments received during the consultation period is under way. B. Analysis 52. The national legislation described above illustrates the three primary elements at play in efforts to regulate private military and security companies: the banning of certain activities of such companies; requiring these companies to be registered with national authorities and licensing their activities abroad; and efforts to establish jurisdiction in the home countries of such companies for violations of human rights and criminal law that occurred abroad. The South African legislation and the Swiss draft law both include bans on certain activities and encompass registration and licensing. In contrast, in the United States, legislative efforts have focused primarily on jurisdictional issues. There is no legislative ban on activities or registration and licensing model comparable to that of South Africa and Switzerland, although some activities of private military and security companies (such as the export of weapons) may require licences, and vetting and training requirements are often included in United States Government contracts with private military and security companies. 1. Constraints on activities of private military and security companies 53. Under the South African legislation and the Swiss draft law, private military and security companies are prohibited from undertaking specific activities. In the former, this ban is reflected in the prohibition of mercenary activities. In the latter, it takes the form of an absolute prohibition on direct participation in hostilities and mandates Swiss authorities, when determining whether to issue a licence for activities abroad, to consider whether the activities will take place in the context of armed conflict. 54. The Swiss draft law also includes specific situations in which the State can use private security companies and the standards that such companies must meet to receive State contracts. Private military and security companies can be used only to protect people, guard facilities, for the protection and transfer of tangible and intangible assets and for data protection and handling. Some of the more controversial uses of private military and security companies, such as detention operations and interrogation, are notably absent from this list. While United States legislation does not preclude private military and security companies from performing any specific functions, there is a move in the legislature to reach an understanding about what activities are inherently governmental and should not be outsourced, with interrogation falling into this category. 13