A/HRC/42/39 deprivation of liberty such as institutions for persons with psychosocial disabilities, hostels and shelters for asylum migrants and other such facilities. 25 These registers should clearly note, in a unified manner, the requisite personal details of each detained person and record the details of when, why and how the person arrived at the facility and the date of release or transfer to another facility. Such registers must also record the steps taken to ensure that the detention remains legal, including the dates on which the individual was presented before a judicial authority for the periodic review of the legality of continued detention. 69. The registers should be compiled and updated in such detail as to allow any independent inspection or monitoring body, including the Working Group, to ascertain whether the safeguards have been observed. This would always require not only the recording of the date and time when the detainee arrived in the facility but also the date and time of the arrest, to allow verification of whether the time spent in transit from the place of arrest to the facility was excessive. 70. The Working Group calls upon all States to review the use of detention registers in all places of deprivation of liberty with a view to maximizing the use of these registers as tools in the prevention of arbitrary detention. C. Use of the Working Group’s opinions in domestic proceedings 71. Since introducing a new follow-up procedure in the concluding paragraphs of its opinions in August 2016,26 the Working Group has continued to inform the Human Rights Council of the progress made in addressing specific cases of arbitrary deprivation of liberty, as well as any failure to take action. As part of this follow-up procedure, the Working Group seeks information from sources and Governments on implementation of its recommendations, including whether the victim has been released, whether compensation or other reparations have been made, whether an investigation has been conducted into the violation of the victim’s rights, whether changes have been made to harmonize the domestic law and practice of the country with its international human rights obligations and any other action taken to implement the opinion. 72. The Working Group wishes to highlight the importance of national judiciaries in implementing the recommendations made in its opinions, particularly in ordering the release and compensation of detained individuals.27 During the reporting period, the Working Group was informed that two of its opinions had been raised by defence counsel during legal argument in domestic proceedings. According to the information received, the Working Group’s opinions were taken into account by national courts in conditionally releasing two detained individuals in Turkey,28 and during a public hearing before the Supreme Court of the Republic of Korea on conscientious objection to military service and its status under international human rights law.29 In the latter case, the Government informed the Working Group that in November 2018, the Supreme Court reversed its jurisprudence, which had previously considered the punishment of conscientious objectors as necessary to public safety, and that this could result in detained objectors being eligible to file a claim for compensation.30 73. While the use of Working Group opinions in domestic proceedings has had a positive impact in some cases, there is scope for greater use to be made of the opinions in national courts. As the Working Group has confirmed in its jurisprudence, there is no 25 26 27 28 29 30 A/HRC/36/37, paras. 50–56. A/HRC/36/37, paras. 10–11. A/HRC/19/57, para. 82. Minutes of judicial hearing of the Istanbul 37th Criminal Court, 3 July 2018 (citing opinion No. 11/2018). Transcript of closing statements made in a public hearing held by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Korea on 30 August 2018 (citing opinion No. 40/2018). See opinion No. 69/2018, para. 15. See also the Government’s follow-up information, available at www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Detention/Opinions/ROK-Reply_to_letter_WGAD_2019-0225_10-50-23.pdf. 29