A/HRC/29/51 42. Resolution 2178 (2014) includes a specific and comprehensive human rights clause.86 Significant concerns have nonetheless been expressed concerning the broad nature of some of the provisions and the lack of definition of the terms “terrorism” or “extremism”, which, on the basis of past experience, may lead some Governments to use the resolution to justify repressive measures against political dissenters with the apparent endorsement of the Security Council. 87 Similarly, the standard adopted for enforcement action, that is, credible information that the individual will engage in the acts set out in the resolution, arguably provides too much latitude to States and could result in arbitrary enforcement action being taken. 43. In the same resolution, the Security Council also calls upon Member States to require airlines to provide advance passenger information to the appropriate national authorities in order to detect when individuals who may fall under the definition of foreign terrorist fighters are travelling by civilian aircraft. While it is clear from the language of the resolution that this should not be done by resorting to profiling based on stereotypes founded on grounds of discrimination prohibited under international law, well-founded concern has been expressed about the practical implementation of the resolution, as it may have a serious impact on a person’s right to privacy. Measures that interfere with the right to privacy must be authorized by domestic law that is accessible and precise and that conforms to the requirements of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Those measures must also pursue a legitimate aim and they must meet the tests of necessity and proportionality.88 44. In the view of the Special Rapporteur, the approach adopted by the Security Council to the phenomenon of foreign terrorist fighters could create legal uncertainty in efforts to identify those to whom it is intended to apply, whether to members of all non-State armed groups or those defined as terrorist groups under national law, international law, or both. The Council stresses the urgent need to implement these measures with respect to those fighters associated with ISIL, among others. However, the scope of the resolution is not limited to foreign fighters directly associated with ISIL but, rather, depends on national implementing measures. The Special Rapporteur considers that States should ensure that, in implementing resolution 2178 (2014), they ensure that national measures are applied only to those individuals who are conclusively shown to meet the criteria laid down by the Council. They should also ensure that they strictly observe the human rights provisions contained within the resolution itself, which include the right to independent and impartial adjudication and adequate due process, and, more broadly, the principle of legality enshrined in article 15 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.89 Criminal liability, including any definition provided in the law, must be precisely framed and must respect the principle of legal certainty. 45. A number of other rights may also be affected by national measures to implement the resolution.90 Measures such as the seizure and retention of passports or identity cards 86 87 88 89 90 14 See General Assembly resolution 60/288. See A/HRC/28/28, paras. 46 and 47. See also Martin Scheinin, “Back to post-9/11 panic? Security Council resolution on foreign freedom fighters”, Just Security, 23 September 2014, available from http://justsecurity.org/15407/post-911-panic-security-council-resolution-foreign-terrorist-fightersscheinin/, and “A Comment on Security Council Res 2178 (Foreign Terrorist Fighters) as a ʽForm’ of Global Governance”, Just Security, 6 October 2014, available from http://justsecurity.org/15989/comment-security-council-res-2178-foreign-fighters-form-globalgovernance/. See A/69/397 and the report of OHCHR on the right to privacy in the digital age (A/HRC/27/37). See A/HRC/28/28, paras. 48 and 49. Ibid., paras. 49 and 50.