A/HRC/4/88 page 8 terrorism to remain in the country for the purposes of intelligence-gathering and monitoring, while adhering strictly to human rights and the rule of law. In any case, States must respect the principle of non-refoulement as vital to ensuring the prevention of torture. B. Procedural obligations 17. States have an obligation to conduct any transfer of detainees in a manner which is transparent and consistent with human rights and the rule of law, including the right to respect for a person’s inherent dignity, the right of everyone to recognition before the law and the right to due process. The international human rights legal framework requires that any deprivation of liberty be based upon grounds and procedures established by law, that detainees be informed of the reasons for the detention and promptly notified of the charges against them, and that they be provided with access to legal counsel. In addition, prompt and effective oversight of detention by a judicial officer must be ensured to verify the legality of the detention and to protect other fundamental rights of the detainee. Even in states of emergency, minimum access to legal counsel and prescribed reasonable limits upon the length of preventative detention remain mandatory. Moreover, national authorities have an obligation to prevent human rights abuses and to actively investigate and prosecute any allegation of practices which may involve the transfer or detention of individuals in a manner inconsistent with international law. 18. The Human Rights Committee has held that denying individuals contact with family and others violates the States’ obligation under ICCPR to treat prisoners with humanity. It has also stressed the importance of provisions requiring that detainees should be held in places that are publicly recognized and that there must be proper registration of the names of detainees and places of detention. The prohibition against unacknowledged detention, taking of hostages or abductions, and enforced disappearance is absolute. The seriousness of these violations is reflected in the newly adopted International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, article 2 of which defines an enforced disappearance as “the arrest, detention, abduction or any other form of deprivation of liberty committed by agents of the State or by persons or groups of persons acting with the authorization, support or acquiescence of the State, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or by concealment of the fate or whereabouts of the disappeared person, which place such a person outside the protection of the law”. The Convention affirms the right of a victim to know the truth about the circumstances of an enforced disappearance and the fate of the disappeared person, and the right to freedom to seek, receive and impart information to this end. It provides that each State party should take appropriate measures to ensure that enforced disappearance constitutes an offence under its criminal law. Furthermore, the widespread or systematic practice of enforced disappearance constitutes a crime against humanity as defined in applicable international law and shall attract the consequences provided for under such applicable international law. 19. Procedural challenges related to the obligation of non-refoulement may also arise in the context of immigration and refugee law. For example, in some States concerns have been raised with regard to the possible misuse and abuse of refugee and immigration procedures by individuals suspected of terrorist activity, while others have expressed concerns related to the right of an individual to appeal against a denial of refugee status. 20. In this regard, reference should be made to the flexibilities built in to the framework of international human rights law and international refugee law, which contains a number of