A/HRC/13/36 elements that should be considered by Member States to ensure that those actors are accountable. 36. A particular concern is that of rendition and extraordinary rendition that arises from increased intelligence cooperation. Extraordinary rendition is almost certain to constitute or facilitate a violation of a variety of human rights, especially the rights that protect individuals against arbitrary arrest, forcible transfer, enforced disappearance or the subjection of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.23 States must fulfil their obligations under the different treaties and standards, and ensure that their territory is not used to transfer persons to places where they are likely to be subjected to torture.24 37. In the absence of procedural safeguards that protect legal rights such as due process, persons who are subject to such transfers have no means of challenging their transfer. Hence, States should take all practical steps to determine whether foreign movements through their territories involve practices that can lead to irreparable harm. States have an obligation to investigate the role of their agents (both military and intelligence) who may have been involved in facilitating these renditions,25 to sanction those responsible, and to provide reparation for victims.26 States also have a responsibility to put in place procedures to address these issues, whether in reference to their own agents or to foreign agents, and to regulate the use of their airspace. States are further required to ensure accountability for past practices.27 38. There should be controls against the misuse of exceptional powers by institutions that are not subject to sufficient democratic and civilian control, in particular intelligence or military agencies or special police. States need to ensure confined powers, the review of accountability and oversight mechanisms. Such controls might encompass the process of authorizing special powers and the remedies for people claiming abuse of these powers. Controls can occur either before or after the use of powers. 39. Intelligence-gathering activities must be regulated by law, monitored as much as possible by independent agencies, and subject to judicial review. Under international human rights law, any act that impacts human rights must be lawful; it must be prescribed and regulated by law. This means that any search, seizure, surveillance activity, apprehension or data collection about a person must be clearly authorized by law. States amending regulations governing legal or administrative procedures to prevent the non- 23 24 25 26 27 14 See footnote 20 supra, p. 81. In the Burgos Case (1981), the Human Rights Committee established that “jurisdiction” was not a reference to where the violation took place, “but rather to the relationship between the individual and the State in relation to a violation of any of the rights set forth in the Covenant, wherever they occurred”. Conclusions and recommendations on Colombia, 4 February 2004 (CAT/C/CR/31/1), para. 9 (d) (iii); conclusions and recommendations on Ecuador, 15 November 1993 (A/49/44), paras. 97–105, at 105. Case Incal v. Turkey of 9 June 1998, Reports 1998–IV, paras. 65–73. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Case L.K. v. the Netherlands, 16 March 1993 (CERD/C/42/D/1991), paras. 6.4 and 6.6. In article 23 of the United Nations Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law; the jurisprudence and practice have been classified in the United Nations Principles on Reparation as encompassing, among others, measures such as ensuring civilian control over military and security forces, strengthening the independence of the judiciary, protection of legal, medical, media and related personnel and human rights defenders, and human rights training. See Statement by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture, 26 June 2009. GE.10-10442