A/HRC/4/88 page 14 IV. CONCLUSIONS 32. I recall in the report above the importance of placing human rights at the core of international cooperation in counter-terrorism and the obligation of all States to ensure that measures taken to combat terrorism comply with their obligations under international human rights law, in particular the right to recognition before the law, due process, and non-refoulement. Compliance with international human rights standards is essential where any counter-terrorism measure involves the deprivation of an individual’s liberty. In particular, States must ensure that any transfer of persons from one territory to another is undertaken pursuant to a prescription by law and within the framework of international law. 33. International cooperation is vital to ensuring respect for human rights standards in relation to sanctions against individuals suspected of involvement in terrorist activity. With regard to the United Nations sanctions regime, further improvements are needed to ensure a listing process which is transparent, based on clear criteria, and with an appropriate, explicit, and uniformly applied standard of evidence, as well as an effective, accessible and independent mechanism of review for individuals and concerned States. Fair and clear procedures must include the right of an individual to be informed of the measures taken and to know the case against him or her; the right of such a person to be heard within a reasonable time by the relevant decision-making body; the right to effective review by a competent, independent review mechanism; the right of such a person to representation with respect to all proceedings; and the right of such a person to an effective remedy. 34. Further challenges to human rights in the context of counter-terrorism include issues related to judicial cooperation, such as questions related to the gathering of information by one State at the request of another; the transfer of information from one jurisdiction to another; judicial proceedings involving evidence gathered abroad; and the use of intelligence information in judicial proceedings. Practical hurdles to effective judicial cooperation in counter-terrorism include issues related to the impact of the origins of intelligence information on its admissibility as evidence; differences in the definition of the elements of crime between jurisdictions, as well as “dual criminality” concerns; procedures for gathering evidence, in particular where interrogation of witnesses or suspects is coercive and amounts to torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment; unlawful interferences with privacy with respect to interception, search, seizure and surveillance; the right to remedy for violation of human rights in the context of evidence gathering and information-sharing; the transfer and/or admissibility of evidence gathered by unlawful means; the principle of legality in relation to the definition of terrorist offences; the protection of witnesses; and questions related to the burden of proof in criminal proceedings. My Office will continue to reflect on these issues with a view to assisting States in strengthening the effectiveness of mutual legal assistance, respect for human rights and upholding the rule of law in effectively countering terrorism. -----