A/HRC/44/50/Add.1 Ordinance, protesters must notify the police officer in charge of the police station closest to the location of the assembly of their intentions, in writing, six hours in advance of the proposed gathering. Failure to notify may result in all organizers, promoters and individuals taking part in the protest being guilty of an offence. He recalls that failure to notify authorities of an assembly does not render an assembly unlawful, 4 and notes that under this legislation spontaneous and urgent assemblies are prohibited, in contravention of international human rights standards. 37. Article 77 of the Police Ordinance specifies that an assistant superintendent or officer of a higher grade may prohibit or place “necessary” restrictions on a protest in the interests of the preservation of public order. Under article 78, police officers may also direct the conduct of all assemblies and processions in any public place, prescribe the routes by which and the times at which such processions may pass, and direct all crowds of 12 or more persons to disperse when they have reason to apprehend any breach of the peace. He notes that organizers should not be required to negotiate the time, place or manner of an assembly with authorities, as such requirements would be tantamount to restricting the planned assembly.5 38. Chapter VIII of the Penal Code regulates offences against public tranquillity, and provides an enumerative list of assemblies that may be considered as unlawful. 39. Department Order No. 19 provides guidance on the management of assemblies. This is supplemented by IG Circular 2595/2016, which states that measures that may be taken to disperse unlawful assemblies should necessarily be in terms of the law, proportionate to the situation that has developed, and purely for the purpose of maintaining law and order and protecting the society. It also states that the use of force should be the last possible resort, should be proportionate to the situation that has developed, and should follow the directions contained in sections 95, 96, and 97 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which outline the steps to be taken in the dispersal of unlawful assemblies. Use of force under the Circular must be graded, using the type of force that is likely to be effective and would cause the least possible harm to the offenders and others in the vicinity, and it states that it is of the utmost importance that police officers in the process of protecting law and order do not intentionally or otherwise infringe upon the fundamental rights of people. The Special Rapporteur welcomes efforts to ensure that these provisions comply with international human rights standards and best practices. 40. The Prevention of Terrorism Act, which was passed in 1979, was planned as a temporary law. It was only supposed to remain in effect for a period of three years, but it remains in force today. There has been a long-standing demand for the repeal of this law in line with the State party’s obligations under Council resolution 30/1, especially by civil society and United Nations human rights mechanisms. During his discussions, he heard allegations that the Act was in some cases used against participants in peaceful assemblies owing to the broad discretionary powers that it confers on police. Provisions under this law stipulate much harsher penalties than those found under regular criminal law, and bail is also restricted. 41. The draft Counter-terrorism Act, submitted to Parliament to replace the Prevention of Terrorism Act, would empower a police officer, not below the rank of senior superintendent, to issue directives to the public, without an order of a magistrate, not to enter or leave any specified area or premises. He expresses his concern, as such directives may potentially be used to prevent a person from exercising his or her right to freedom of movement, to prevent journalists from accessing and covering events, or to prevent persons from protesting at particular sites or marches, for example. 42. At the time of his visit, the draft Counter-terrorism Act was still before Parliament; however, its progress had come to a standstill. While the future of the bill is unclear, its 4 5 A/HRC/31/66, para. 23. A/HRC/23/39, para. 56. 7