A/HRC/17/28* 38. According to a number of international instruments, human rights may not be used in a way that is aimed at the destruction of other rights. 12 These provisions form a legal basis for the small number of non-content-neutral restrictions on demonstrations that are permissible, such as the promotion of violence. 39. According to the Human Rights Committee, a notification requirement in respect of planned demonstrations is not necessarily an infringement of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly, 13 and the same probably applies to a permit requirement system, provided there is the assumption such a permit will be issued. 40. Spontaneous demonstrations occur where there is no opportunity for prior notice or to apply for a permit. If there is indeed no such opportunity, the assembly should be regarded as legal and should therefore be protected. 14 41. Derogation from the right to freedom of assembly is possible under article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights during a state of emergency. 15 42. Only “peaceful assembly” is protected by this provision. However, the individual does not lose the protection of the right when sporadic or isolated violence occurs in the crowd. 16 Right to life 43. During demonstrations, the right to life of protesters, the police and the public may be at stake. The right to life, sometimes described as the “supreme human right,” constitutes a rule of customary international law and is one of the central rights recognized in international human rights treaties. The primary purpose of the recognition of the right to life is to protect people from being killed by the State, the entity that claims and, to a large extent, exercises monopoly on the use of force. 17 44. Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person,” while article 6.1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that “every human being has the inherent right to life, [which] shall be protected by law, and [that] no one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.” 18 The word “inherent” underscores the fundamental importance of this right, while “protected by law” implies not only protection by the State from infringement by other members of society, but also respect by agents of the State. It should be noted that “arbitrary” deprivation of life is covered by the right; non-arbitrary deprivation of life falls outside its protection. 45. According to general comment No. 6 of the Human Rights Committee on the right to life (para. 3), States parties should take measures to, inter alia, “prevent arbitrary killings by their own security forces. The deprivation of life by the authorities of the State is a 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 See, for example, UDHR, art. 30; ICCPR, art. 5; European Convention, art. 17; African Charter, art. 27.2 which states that everyone has the duty to exercise their rights with due regard to the rights of others. See Auli Kivenmaa v. Finland, No. 412/1990 (CCPR/C/50/D/412/1990). See Bukta and Others v. Hungary, ECHR 25691/04 (17 July 2007), para. 32. American Convention, art. 27 and European Convention, art. 15 also provide for derogation from freedom of peaceful assembly. See Zilberberg v. Moldova, ECHR 61821/00 (4 May 2004), and Ezelin v. France, ECHR 11800/85 (26 April 1991). See Ralph Crawshaw and Leif Holmström, Essential cases on human rights for the police (Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff, 2006), p. 39. See also UDHR, art. 3. 9