A/HRC/18/32 16. From 10 to 19 November 2010, the Working Group visited South Africa to examine the country’s legislation on mercenaries and private military and security companies and its impact on human rights. 17. Since the end of apartheid in 1994, many South Africans with extensive military skills and experience have been unwilling or unable to find employment in South Africa. As a result, they have offered their services abroad and many have been employed by international private military and security companies. Some have become involved in mercenary activities. In order to address these developments, South Africa was one of the first countries to adopt legislation on the provision of “foreign military assistance” in 1998. However, the Working Group found that there were a number of challenges in the implementation of this legislation, some of which relating to the functioning of the National Conventional Arms Control Committee, the entity charged with reviewing requests for authorization to provide security services in areas of armed conflict. Others are linked to difficulties with prosecutions. Overall, it was clear to the Working Group that the 1998 legislation has not had a significant impact on the private military and security industry. 18. Following the coup attempt in Equatorial Guinea in 2004 in which several South African mercenaries were involved, South Africa adopted new legislation in 2006 to address some of the gaps in the 1998 legislation. This more recent legislation is not yet in force and it remains to be seen whether it will effectively regulate the provision of security services in areas of armed conflict. 19. The Working Group and the authorities also discussed the framework for regulating the domestic private security industry in South Africa. Since there are some potential areas of overlap between the regulatory rules covering those private security companies working in South Africa and those working abroad, the Working Group encouraged the authorities to coordinate and harmonize the two regulatory frameworks. 20. The Working Group recalled that the establishment of a regulatory and monitoring regime for private military and security companies was only a first step towards ensuring accountability in cases of human rights violations. It recommended that the authorities should consider the establishment of accountability mechanisms for private military and security companies at the domestic level. The Working Group also recommended that effective remedies should be offered to potential victims of human rights violations involving private military and security companies. The full report and recommendations are contained in an addendum to the present report (A/HRC/18/32/Add.3). 21. The Working Group undertook a visit to Iraq from 12 to 16 June 2011. During the visit, the Working Group examined the measures taken by the Government to regulate the activities of private military and security companies operating in the country and their impact on the enjoyment of human rights. The Working Group learned that the number of incidents involving private military and security companies had decreased in recent years. This could be attributed to several factors: the decrease in their military-related activities in Iraq (especially in mobile protection); stricter regulation by the Iraqi authorities; and efforts by the United States to tighten oversight of its private security contractors operating in Iraq. The Working Group commended the efforts of the Iraqi and United States authorities in this regard. 22. Despite this decrease in incidents, Iraq continues to grapple with the granting of legal immunity extended to private security contractors under order 17 issued by the Coalition Provisional Authority. The immunity prevented prosecutions in Iraqi courts. Nor have prosecutions in the home countries of such companies been successful. Four years after the Nissour Square incident, the case against the alleged perpetrators is still pending in United States courts. 23. In a welcome development, the 2009 Status of Forces Agreement reached between Iraq and the United States contains a provision removing the immunity of some private foreign security contractors in Iraq. It is not clear, however, whether this removal of 7