A/HRC/40/52 3. Terrorism sanctions and the criminalization of various forms of support for terrorism 20. While targeted sanctions can be useful to address terrorism financing, they can also severely hamper the work of humanitarian and other civil society organizations or be used to maliciously target them. The mandate holder has already noted how abusive designations have been made easier by the broadened criteria introduced by the Security Council in its resolution 1617 (2005) under the targeted terrorism sanction regime. 37 Although the Security Council Committee pursuant to resolutions 1267 (1999), 1989 (2011) and 2253 (2015) concerning Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Da’esh), Al-Qaida and associated individuals, groups, undertakings and entities has never listed an individual solely on the basis of the provision of medical or humanitarian assistance, it is worrying that medical activities had been referenced as part of the basis for listing two individuals and two entities. 38 Under national and regional terrorism sanctions lists requested pursuant to resolution 1373 (2001), the lack of a definition of terrorism also allows arbitrary or malicious designations of any individual or group, including civil society organizations, under the legitimizing umbrella of the Council.39 4. Absence of exemption clauses for civil society actors 21. In both its legislative action and its sanctions regime, the Security Council disallows, almost entirely, any form of loose support for terrorism or for terrorist groups. While the sanctions regime administered by the United Nations provides for humanitarian exemptions, national and regional regimes are not required to provide for humanitarian exemptions, thereby leaving it up to individual States to include them, or not, in their own national provisions.40 In its resolution 72/284, the General Assembly urged States to ensure that counter-terrorism measures did not impede humanitarian activities or engagement. Humanitarian exemptions are critical in protecting civil society actors operating in challenging environments where terrorist groups are active from sanctions regimes and counter-terrorism measures.41 22. The Special Rapporteur fully supports the recommendation of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions that States should unambiguously exempt humanitarian actions from their counter-terrorism measures at every possible opportunity, nationally, regionally and internationally, and that the Security Council should adopt a resolution expressly clarifying that humanitarian protection and assistance must never be conceptualized as support for terrorism and suppressed or criminalized on that basis. 42 The Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism further recommends that adequate remedies at all levels be available and accessible to all civil society actors affected by sanctions, not solely humanitarian actors. Measures limiting the movement of “foreign terrorist fighters” and “terrorists” 5. 23. In its resolutions 2170 (2014), 2178 (2014), and 2396 (2017), the Security Council decided that States were to prosecute as “serious criminal offences” the travel, recruitment and financing of “foreign terrorist fighters”. Mandate holders have already widely examined the gaping human rights shortcomings of some of these measures. 43 Given the large number of individuals who can be caught in the resolutions’ broad net, there is evident concern that some States will abuse the systems set up through these resolutions to target “undesirable” individuals, including members of civil society. This will lead to such individuals being subjected to the numerous impingements that these resolutions allow on 37 A/73/361, para. 19. See also A/65/258, A/67/396 and A/HRC/34/61. 38 Alice Debarre, “Safeguarding medical care and humanitarian action in the UN counterterrorism framework” (International Peace Institute, 2018). The Security Council defines “support” for terrorism very loosely. See its resolution 1373 (2001), para. 1 (d). 39 40 41 42 43 A/70/371, para. 32. Norwegian Refugee Council, “Principles under pressure” (2018). A/73/314, para. 52. Exemptions exist, but can be limited. See also A/70/371 and A/73/314, para. 51. A/HRC/29/51 and A/73/361. 7