A/HRC/30/36 reasons. As with any form of detention, such individuals must have judicial means to challenge the detention.14 The Working Group has noted in particular that ongoing periodic judicial reviews are necessary to avoid prolonged detentions. 15 B. Peaceful protests and arbitrary detention 63. The Working Group has received information and communications from different parts of the world on the increase of detentions of persons in the context of peaceful protests that could be considered as arbitrary in conformity with the Working Group’s methods of work. Therefore, the Working Group will consider this matter as a topic in its work for 2017 in coordination with other special procedures of the Human Rights Council, the regional human rights institutions and other relevant stakeholders. C. Remedies for arbitrary detention 64. The duty to comply with international law rests on everyone, including domestic authorities and private individuals. International and domestic law must provide remedies to make international law effective. States are under a positive obligation to provide an effective remedy for violations of international human rights law. The remedy for arbitrary detention will regularly be immediate release. In most cases, including those where release is not a remedy, the individual has a right to compensation. This right is firmly grounded in widespread international practice16 and on the opinio juris of States; it is also included in a wide range of international instruments. It is found in the domestic law of almost all States, and breaches are denounced. The right constitutes a general principle of international law, based both in domestic law and its application across sectors of international law and treaty regimes.17 Domestic law, whether constitutional or based on legislation or case law, has a particular role in the field of human rights law where the duties are primarily those of States to individuals. Domestic law is scrutinized in the Human Rights Council and its various mechanisms; indeed, many of those mechanisms have as their main aim the review of domestic law and practice. This produces much evidence of State practice and opinio juris. In addition, declarations and other statements made by States about their own law and its compliance with international law and further reaching human rights standards, and comments and denunciations of other States, serve as additional sources of opinio juris. 65. Domestic courts have a particular role in granting tort remedies (responsabilité administrative et constitutionnelle). Domestic law cannot erect barriers in the form of immunities, jurisdictional limitations, procedural hurdles or defences based on an Act of State doctrine that would limit the effectiveness of international law. One basis for jurisdiction is the exercise of control over individuals, and under international law it exists whenever an act attributable in the widest sense to a State has an adverse effect on anyone anywhere in the world. Article 8 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides that everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for 14 15 16 17 Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, deliberation No. 4. See A/HRC/27/48/Add.3, paras. 111–119. See International Court of Justice, Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of Guinea v. Democratic Republic of the Congo), Compensation, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2012, p. 324, Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of Guinea v. Democratic Republic of the Congo), Merits, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2010, p. 639 and Ahmadou Sadio Diallo (Republic of Guinea v. Democratic Republic of the Congo), Preliminary Objections, Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2007, p. 582. Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal), Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2012, p. 422. 19