A/HRC/27/50 47. The criteria for granting licences to PSCs and/or their employees vary among the States. In all of the States reviewed, PSC employees must not have any criminal convictions and must possess certain training qualifications. Most of the laws do not specify the training requirements and none refers to training that includes human rights law or standards. Furthermore, the relevant laws do not specify whether the disclosure of past criminal convictions also includes acts involving human rights violations. In terms of a central register for PSCs, only three States have laws pertaining to that. Although all the laws analysed require PSCs to obtain a licence, only four States require that individual security personnel or employees hold a licence. The requirement for PSC personnel to obtain licences can be an important vetting mechanism to ensure that qualified persons are employed, but also that persons with past convictions relating to human rights abuses are excluded. 48. Notwithstanding the gaps and lack of uniformity among the laws reviewed, some good practices were observed as follows: foreign companies are not allowed to engage in the PSC domain without meeting legal requirements;65 PSCs are required to cooperate with the civil defence authority in times of emergency, such as natural disaster;66 PSCs are required to have a sound organizational structure with post accountability and a security guard management system;67 liability of legal persons and the PSC;68 revocation of licence due to engagement in criminal activity;69 PSCs are prohibited from conducting criminal investigations;70 PSCs are prohibited from exercising any of the powers conferred on public security officers;71 and PSCs are required to keep an internal data register.72 These practices provide the necessary framework that can contribute to the monitoring of human rights violations. 49. None of the eight States reviewed is a party to the International Convention against the Recruitment, Use, Financing and Training of Mercenaries. 2. Scope of the legislation 50. In the States reviewed, the relevant laws and regulations governing private security companies (PSCs) refer to either private security services or private security companies;73 none refers to military services. Divergent approaches to regulating PSCs exist not only among the States reviewed, but also within a given State. For instance, Pakistan has no 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 14 China and, to some extent, India. Philippines. China. India, Malaysia, Pakistan (Sindh Province) and Sri Lanka. India, Philippines and United Arab Emirates. Malaysia and United Arab Emirates. Malaysia, Pakistan (Sindh and Punjab Provinces). India, Sri Lanka and United Arab Emirates. See China, Order of the State Council No. 564, Regulation on the Administration of Security and Guarding Services, 2009 (State Council Order No. 564, 2009); India, Private Security Agencies (Regulation) Act, 2005 (Act No. 29, 2005); Malaysia, Private Agencies Act, 1971, incorporating all amendments up to 1 January 2006 (Act 27, 1971); Philippines, The Private Security Agency Law, 1969 (Republic Act No. 5487, 1969), as amended by Presidential Decree No. 11, 1972 and, subsequently, by Presidential Decrees No. 100, 1973, and No. 1919, 1984. A bill on private military and security companies is currently being debated in the National Parliament; Singapore, Private Security Industry Act, 2007 (Act 38, 2007); Sri Lanka, Regulation of Private Security Agencies Act, 1998 (Act No. 45, 1998); and United Arab Emirates, Federal Decree No. 37, 2006, concerning Private Security Companies (Decree No. 37, 2006)..