A/HRC/43/35 instrumental to the effective protection of non-derogable rights, such as the right to take proceedings before a court to review the lawfulness of detention and fundamental requirements of the right to fair trial, must also be respected in all circumstances. 54 In addition to international human rights law, which continues to apply during periods of armed conflict, the outbreak of armed conflict also brings complementary norms of international humanitarian law into play.55 These include provisions regulating detention in armed conflict and protecting detainees, inter alia, by means of procedural safeguards and judicial guarantees.56 Despite the consistent position of international and regional courts and human rights mechanisms that international human rights law remains applicable in this context, some States continue to dispute the extent of its applicability in armed conflict and its interplay with international humanitarian law. This can give rise to the concern that applicable human rights obligations may not be adequately respected.57 This comprehensive legal framework notwithstanding, extraterritorial detention in the context of armed conflict raises a number of concerns regarding human rights and the integrity of the judicial system. A. Factors detrimental to the integrity of the judicial system 15. While detention in peacetime is generally implemented by State law enforcement agencies and overseen by civilian courts, detention in the context of armed conflict is often carried out by State armed forces or, on occasion, intelligence agencies. In such contexts, law enforcement and regular judicial systems may not be available or have limited legal or practical capacity to address all cases of deprivation of liberty. Oversight, where it takes place, is often exercised by military justice or administrative bodies. This renders it more likely that the ordinary operation of the judicial system will be deviated from and raises concerns that procedural safeguards may be breached and that rights violations may ensue. 16. These concerns are enhanced when States are involved in an armed conflict outside their territory. States often have only provisional infrastructure, limited personnel and scarce resources at their disposal outside their own territory, all of which may be inadequate for the effective operation of detention facilities and related judicial procedures. Personnel deployed to carry out detention operations in extraterritorial conflict zones may lack sufficient expertise or training (e.g., regarding the gathering of evidence or treatment of detainees), and their ability to attend to detainees is at times further compromised by language barriers and cultural divides. Inadequate infrastructure and expertise can have a particularly detrimental effect when it comes to safeguarding the rights of detainees who are particularly vulnerable or have special needs, such as children or persons requiring medical attention.58 17. Further problems may arise when detaining authorities operating extraterritorially lack the information and means necessary to facilitate family links and other contacts. Failure to record the personal details of detainees59 makes it more difficult to track them and to inform their families of their whereabouts and well-being. Because of the often transitory nature of extraterritorial detention facilities and security concerns resulting from proximity to battle zones, humanitarian agencies may also have limited access to detainees. The absence of records and lack of contact with places outside of the detention facility increase the risk of human rights violations, including enforced disappearances, as 54 55 56 57 58 59 Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 29, para. 16. Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996; Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall; Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo; Human Rights Committee, general comments No. 29, para. 3; No. 31, para. 11; and No. 35, para. 64. With regard to detention in international armed conflicts, see the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, Protocol I Additional to the Geneva Conventions and customary international law. For detention in non-international armed conflicts, see common article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, Protocol II Additional to the Geneva Conventions and customary international law. See, e.g., CCPR/C/USA/4, paras. 506–509; Comments by the Government of Australia on the draft Basic Principles of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, 17 March 2015, paras. 4–6. CRC/C/OPAC/USA/CO/2, para. 37; International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), “Strengthening legal protection for persons deprived of their liberty in relation to non-international armed conflict: regional consultations 2012–13”, background paper, 2013, pp. 6–7. CAT/C/USA/CO/2, para. 16. 7