A/HRC/4/15 page 11 they should not be placed in detention; they should preferably be kept in open facilities and placed in closed facilities only as a matter of last resort. The latter should be set up in accordance with international standards, indefinite incarceration should be avoided and the facilities should be open to some outside monitors such as the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). The Office should be permitted to enter all areas where those who seek refuge may be present. Interestingly, some sources indicate that the number of forced returns may have declined slightly after the missile and nuclear tests in 2006, perhaps to show disapproval of the country of origin. However, the preferred approach based on international law is for all countries to adhere strictly to the principle of non-refoulement and treat those who seek refuge humanely. 26. Third, there is the issue of international burden-sharing. On the one hand, it is incumbent upon the international community to exert effective influence on the country of origin to address the root causes leading to outflows. On the other hand, the international community should help the first asylum countries in finding durable solutions for the refugee problem. This may entail policy and resource supports and resettlement places in other countries as appropriate. Some countries are already opening the door wider to resettle refugees from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, at times directly from first asylum countries and at times via other channels. 27. Fourth, the pattern of arrivals is changing precisely because of the elasticity of the different practices of neighbouring countries. There is a kind of “push-down, pop-up” phenomenon whereby if one country takes a stringent approach towards those seeking refuge, the refugees, usually by promising to pay intermediaries, seek access to other countries with a more lenient approach. From the interviews which the Special Rapporteur has carried out with arrivals in various neighbouring countries, two patterns have emerged. On the one hand, a number of people spend quite a long time - a period of years - in an asylum country before leaving for other countries. Some are smuggled into the various countries, while others end up in various types of human trafficking such as forced marriage, prostitution, or forced labour. Second, a more recent caseload comprises those who transit briefly - a period of weeks - in a neighbouring first asylum country before leaving for other countries. This is currently the situation facing South-East Asia where some countries are witnessing a larger influx of refugees who merely transit briefly in a neighbouring country. Nearly all cases interviewed by the Special Rapporteur indicated that they or their relatives had either paid various intermediaries to help them flee the country of origin or that they or their relatives had promised to pay upon arrival in the final resettlement country. 28. Along the way, some public officials also profiteer from the situation through extortion; they refuse to release from detention those who have sought refuge unless they are paid. This also poses a dilemma to non-governmental organizations that seek to rescue detainees. Should they pay up, or desist from doing so? It is regrettable that at times these organizations are also classified as criminals when they are merely acting as human rights defenders. There is thus a need to distinguish between them and genuine criminal elements. It is also regrettable that there is a “market value” attached to refugees, who are exploited in a “chain-enchained” manner: at every step of the way from the borders of the country of origin to the final destination country, there is a chain of elements that seek to exploit the needs of refugees and their “worth” in a manner tantamount to slavery. The situation is all the more disquieting since the majority of those seeking refuge are currently women and some children. This is elaborated below in relation to the vulnerability factor.