A/HRC/43/51 D. Exceptional legal regimes and restrictions on the activities of defenders 21. The enactment and prorogation of exceptional legal regimes and measures during conflict or post conflict – such as State- or region-wide emergency or martial laws, and security and antiterrorism legislation, curfews or other decisions restricting access to certain areas – tend to curtail public freedoms, drastically reduce judicial oversight and put defenders and their work at risk. The Special Rapporteur stresses that no circumstances can account for the suspension or sidelining of protections and rights enshrined in the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, which is based on binding norms. In the limited cases where derogations are permissible, these must be prescribed in law, be in accordance with international law and meet both substantive and procedural conditions, including those of necessity and proportionality. 38 22. The Special Rapporteur is concerned by the fact that a number of domestic legal provisions and practices, including under occupation, relating to freedom of movement, assembly and access to information clearly do not stand this test. Unless in line with applicable human rights standards, no restrictions on public freedoms can be considered legitimate nor proportionate if they infringe on defenders’ rights, inter alia, to freely publish impart or disseminate to others views, information and knowledge on all human rights and fundamental freedoms, study, discuss, form and hold opinions on their observance, both in law and in practice, and draw public attention to those matters. 39 National legislation must protect, not open grounds to prevent scrutiny, stifle dissent and interfere with defenders’ legitimate activities. 23. The frequent use of exceptional legislation, along with contested views on the legal regimes applicable in some conflict and post-conflict contexts, and the relative fragmentation of protective and enabling norms covered in this section, highlight the importance of incorporating the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders within national legal frameworks. States and other stakeholders share responsibility for ensuring the Declaration’s effective dissemination and for training civil and military authorities to enforce and comply with its provisions.40 Judicial authorities should also receive training if they are to provide adequate guidance and redress. IV. Concerns regarding protection, impacts and violations of key rights A. Extreme exposure, systematic targeting, wide protection gaps and impunity 24. Defenders are not immune to situations of active hostilities, general insecurity, humanitarian crisis or breakdowns of public institutions and social services. Many engage as volunteers, as part of a group or independently, and are directly affected by the degradation of socioeconomic conditions, notably under occupation. Many are displaced or trapped and unable to access life-saving treatments because of blockades or restrictions on international travel or are killed or injured as a result of ground or airstrikes on their schools and hospitals. No significant progress in protecting defenders in conflict and post-conflict situations will be achieved as long as the most fundamental principles of international law continue to be systematically infringed, without consequences for those responsible. 25. Defenders are also at risk because of the sensitive nature of their work. When uncovering violations perpetrated by parties to armed conflicts, including under occupation, investigating certain cases of disappearances, opposing the expanding role of military forces in law enforcement or contesting public denials of war crimes, they expose themselves. When denouncing corruption and collusion between public actors, private 38 39 40 8 Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 29; A/73/215, para. 24. Declaration, art. 6 (b)–(c); Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 34. Declaration, art. 16.