A/HRC/4/26 page 16 C. Best practices and alternatives to profiling 59. Despite the human rights concerns outlined above, the use of terrorist profiles that include criteria such as ethnicity, national origin and religion is, in the view of the Special Rapporteur, not always forbidden. If, in the context of an investigation into a terrorist crime already committed, there are reasonable grounds to assume that the suspect fits a certain descriptive profile, then the reliance on characteristics such as ethnic appearance, national origin or religion is justified. Similarly, these factors can be employed to target search efforts where there is specific intelligence suggesting that someone fulfilling these characteristics is preparing a terrorist act. The situation is different, however, in the case of preventive counter-terrorism efforts that are not intelligence-led. While profiles used for such efforts may include behavioural or psychological characteristics, the Special Rapporteur is of the view that they may not be based on stereotypical generalizations that certain ethnic or religious groups pose a greater terrorist risk than others. 60. The Special Rapporteur takes the view that, in any event, profiling based on behavioural patterns is significantly more efficient than reliance on ethnicity, national origin or religion. The importance of focusing on behaviour is highlighted, for example, by the experiences of the United States Customs Service. In the late 1990’s, the Customs Service stopped using a profile that was based, among other factors, on ethnicity and gender in deciding whom to search for drugs.38 Instead, the customs agents were instructed to rely on observational techniques, behavioural analysis and intelligence.39 This policy change resulted in a rise in the proportion of searches leading to the discovery of drugs of more than 300 per cent.40 The Special Rapporteur believes that behaviour is an equally significant indicator in the terrorism context. He therefore urges States to ensure that law-enforcement authorities, when engaging in preventive counter-terrorism efforts, use profiles that are based on behavioural, rather than ethnic or religious, characteristics. At the same time, the Special Rapporteur reminds States that behavioural indicators must be implemented in a neutral manner and must not be used as mere proxies for ethnicity, national origin or religion. 61. However, it may not always be possible for law-enforcement agencies to rely on specific intelligence or useful behavioural indicators in the context of preventive counter-terrorism efforts. The Special Rapporteur is of the view that in such situations controls should be universal, affecting everyone equally. Where the costs for blanket searches are deemed to be 38 U.S. General Accounting Office, U.S. Customs Service: Better Targeting of Airline Passengers for Personal Searches Could Produce Better Results (2000), GAO/GGD-00-38, pp. 10-15. 39 40 Ibid., pp. 5-6 and 16. Lamberth Consulting, “Racial profiling doesn’t work”, available at http://www.lamberthconsulting.com/about-racial-profiling/racial-profiling-doesnt-work.asp.