A/HRC/45/9 governmental monitoring efforts. Reports suggest that in a number of countries, State policies have resulted in increased, expedited and unlawful deportations without proper individualized assessments. For example, several ethnic minorities and citizens of Commonwealth descent or their descendants, collectively known as the “Windrush generation”, were allegedly unlawfully deported from the United Kingdom under escort of private security guards and transported by airplane following the passing of the 2016 Immigration Act.41 55. Governments contract charter and commercial airline companies to carry out the deportations and returns. When deportations are carried out by land, or a combination of land and air, a company is contracted to transport the deportees to the border crossing. These companies offer a security service, where the deprivation of liberty of the migrants continues during the period of transportation. Frequently, private security guards escort the deportees. During transport, migrants are reportedly regularly held in restraints, including handcuffs, waist restraint belts, in which people’s arms are shackled to their sides, leg restraints and sometimes head restraints. 42 56. In many countries, deportations reportedly continued despite the COVID-19 pandemic while strict travel restrictions were placed on the general population and borders were effectively closed. This created a risk of spreading the virus from one country to another and put the general populations of these countries, and the employees of airlines, transportation companies and airports, at risk. 57. The broad and unnecessary use of the above-mentioned restraints is among the numerous human rights risks inherent in providing this transportation service. In some cases, restraining the deportee has proven fatal (see para. 71 below) or has caused considerable suffering. There is also a risk for the company of becoming complicit in an act of refoulement by returning individuals to a country where they would be at risk of human rights violations or persecution. This risk is heightened when groups of people are returned without proper individualized assessments, such as in the case of the collective return of persons perceived to be from a particular country to a so-called safe country as part of a specific return agreement. In such cases, companies also risk being complicit in transporting someone who is being separated from their family or a refugee, a victim of trafficking or of torture, or a person who is otherwise in need of protection. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, carrying out deportations puts general populations, the individual migrants concerned and the company’s own employees at risk. Implementation of “externalization” policies D. 58. Private military and security companies play a critical role in facilitating State externalization policies. One aspect of such policies is the management and operation of offshore immigration detention facilities by such companies. For example, the Working Group and other United Nations human rights bodies have repeatedly called on the Government of Australia to terminate its policy of offshore detention in Nauru and on Manus Island in Papua New Guinea, and raised concerns regarding access to appropriate health care and mistreatment of the detained persons by the private security companies contracted by the Government to manage and operate the facilities. 43 These companies and their personnel are directly responsible for the harsh conditions and abuse reported at these centres, while the Government of Australia retains its obligations to protect the rights of the detained migrants due to its “effective control” over them. 44 The host country also has obligations to respect human rights. 59. In addition, companies sell and maintain border security technologies and train border guards and other officials in countries of first arrival, transit or departure on how to use them in order to augment patrolling and surveillance capacities. An increasing number of countries has received such services in order to prevent arrivals well before they reach 41 42 43 44 See GBR 5/2019. See submission by the Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility. See also https://corporatewatch.org/deportation-charter-flights-updated-report-2018. See A/HRC/35/25/Add.3; and AUS 4/2019. CCPR/C/AUS/CO/6, especially para. 35. 13