A/HRC/40/52 appropriate, on how to enhance efforts to implement the Strategy, it is the first United Nations counter-terrorism document to refer to civil society. Unfortunately, the inclusion of the clause “as appropriate” left it to States to determine if and how they wished to engage with civil society and revealed a lack of consensus about civil society’s role in Strategy implementation. This debate has persisted throughout subsequent reviews, leading a number of countries to object to stronger language on civil society engagement. In its resolution 72/284, the latest resolution entitled “The United Nations Global CounterTerrorism Strategy Review”, the Assembly encourages civil society interaction with States and the United Nations system to enhance the implementation of the Strategy “as appropriate”, and encourages Member States and the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force to enhance engagement with civil society. NGOs rightly stated the following: “At a time when civic space is being essentially eroded around the world … we are deeply disappointed that the review does not recognize the essential role that civil society plays in guarding against abusive counter-terrorism practices and responding to and preventing the conditions conducive to terrorism … States can and should do better, and make sure the UN does too.”48 29. Of significant concern to the mandate holder is the adoption of resolutions, by the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council, on the effects of terrorism on human rights.49 These resolutions function to instrumentalize victims in order to bolster the need for greater counter-terrorism measures and thus weaken the international system as a whole. 50 It is of even greater concern that the Assembly has merged this new series of resolutions with the resolutions on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, in a new resolution on terrorism and human rights. 51 The new “streamlined”, resolution does retain some key aspects relating to civil society contained in resolution 72/180, namely, that States must safeguard the work of civil society, and that they are to ensure that measures taken to counter terrorism do not hinder the work and safety of those organizations and that they are in compliance with the obligations of States under international law. Regrettably, some of the key human rights aspects gained during the drafting process of the resolutions on protection of human rights have been lost. Given the range of measures that can affect civil society actors, the Assembly must address the deficits that have followed from the merger. C. Role of new global outsource entities 30. In contradistinction to the United Nations counter-terrorism framework, which, despite administrative flaws, is an inclusive regulatory structure including all States Members of the United Nations and operating within the legal structure of the Charter of the United Nations, a number of opaque and inaccessible outsource entities lacking global legitimacy have consolidated within the counter-terrorism architecture. As these entities – initially – responded to the particular counter-terrorism interests of selected States, they developed a narrower set of perspectives and inputs. They are largely characterized by the development of “soft law” standards and practices, often uninformed by human rights law, and without input from civil society. The exclusion of civil society from these highly influential regulatory bodies underscores the patterns of exclusion and accountability gaps highlighted throughout the present report. Through a process of “exportation” to and ”integration” of regulations and standards into other structures and through national implementation these entities have enabled global regulation that might not have emerged had formal law-making processes been fully complied with. This process raises fundamental concerns about transparency, fairness, sovereignty and oversight. The 48 “Global group of NGOs deplore lack of attention to human rights in latest review of UN’s global counterterrorism strategy by UN Member States”, (11 July 2018). 49 50 For example, General Assembly resolution 72/246 and Human Rights Council resolution 31/30. Article 19, “UNHRC 31: Egypt-led ‘terrorism’ resolution is a danger to human rights”, 31 March 2016. 51 Resolution 73/174. 9