A/HRC/29/51 independent judicial review that can deliver an effective remedy at the level of the United Nations (see A/67/396). While acknowledging the significant improvements brought to the regime,82 concerns remain that most of the shortcomings that had been identified still remain valid and that the regime continues to fall short of international minimum standards of due process. In particular, the Ombudsperson’s comprehensive reports are still not legally binding; the process still lacks transparency; the Ombudsperson still has limited access to confidential information, a challenge she describes as the most significant limitation to the effectiveness of the Ombudsperson process; and the institutional arrangements for the Office of the Ombudsperson still do not afford it proper safeguards for independence.83 39. The Security Council has also taken decisive action against ISIL through a number of subsequent resolutions adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations. In its resolution 2170 (2014), the Council condemned in the strongest terms the terrorist acts of ISIL and its continued gross, systematic and widespread abuses of human rights and violations of international humanitarian law. The Council emphasized the need to ensure that ISIL is held accountable for abuses of human rights and violations of international humanitarian law and stressed the need to bring to justice those within ISIL who commit terrorist acts, as well as foreign terrorist fighters. Recalling that threats to international peace and security caused by terrorist acts must be combated in accordance with international law, including international human rights and humanitarian law, it adopted a number of measures and sanctions to prevent the financing of ISIL, including revenues generated from control of oilfields and related infrastructure, kidnapping for ransom and donations.84 40. The threat posed by the influx of foreign fighters, albeit not a new phenomenon,85 has gained increasing prominence in the context of the armed conflicts in Iraq and the Syrian Arab Republic. With States intent on preventing the ranks of ISIL from growing and exacerbating the conflict, as well as on preventing returning nationals from carrying out attacks on their own soil (so-called “blowback” attacks) or further radicalizing their nationals, the Security Council took decisive action to address the issue of foreign fighters. 41. As already noted, in its resolution 2170 (2014) the Security Council called upon Member States to take national measures to suppress the flow of foreign terrorist fighters joining ISIL and other individuals, groups and entities associated with Al-Qaida in Iraq and the Syrian Arab Republic. In its resolution 2178 (2014), the Council went further, requiring States to adopt a number of measures regarding foreign terrorist fighters, defined as “individuals who travel to a State other than their States of residence or nationality for the purpose of the perpetration, planning, or preparation of, or participation in, terrorist acts or the providing or receiving of terrorist training, including in connection with armed conflict”. In that resolution, the Council decided that Member States should prevent the travel of foreign terrorist fighters, that they should bring them to justice and that they should criminalize a number of actions linked to such fighters concerning travel and its funding and organization or facilitation of recruitment. 82 83 84 85 See Security Council resolutions 1904 (2009), 1989 (2011), 2083 (2012) and 2161 (2014). See S/2015/80, paras. 37–53. See Security Council resolution 2199 (2015), which builds on resolution 2170 (2014) by refining the range of tools available to block the financing of ISIL. See Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights, “Foreign fighters under international law”, Geneva Academy Briefing No. 7 (Geneva, Geneva Academy, 2014). 13