A/HRC/30/34 and private community security services that operate as cooperatives, community action groups or community enterprises, providing security to their members. Chile obliges banking and financial institutions, public entities, armoured transportation companies, strategic companies and public services to maintain their own private guard services. 56 80. Most legislation does not mention international conventions and treaties on human rights except for in Brazil, Colombia and Peru.57 Peru prohibits mercenary activities. A Brazilian 2012 ordinance mentions human rights, in the annexes covering the training curriculum. Colombian law states that “citizens must have sufficient legal recourse for the exercise of their constitutional rights that effectively guarantees and preserves observance of … international treaties and conventions on human rights”.58 81. Colombian regulations require private security personnel to inform the competent authorities when they learn of any criminal act or violation of human rights while carrying out their activities. 82. Most of the reviewed countries expressly prohibit active members of the police and armed forces from undertaking private security activities. In Uruguay (Act No. 275/1999), management-level police officers are prohibited from participating as owners, partners or representatives of companies providing security, or from having any link or relationship with private security companies. Ecuadorian law extends the prohibition to the spouses and relatives to the second degree of consanguinity, to active members of the police and officials, employees and civil servants who work for the Ministry of National Defence, the Ministry of Government, the national police, the armed forces and the Office of Business Oversight. In Colombia, members of the military, police officers in active service, staff of the Ministry of National Defence and the Police, the Administrative Department of Security and the Office of Surveillance and Private Security cannot be partners or employees of security guards.59 Buenos Aires extends this ineligibility to security personnel and employees of intelligence and prison services.60 Chile and Peru do not have this prohibition. 83. The Plurinational State of Bolivia merits special mention, because it prohibits not only the members of the armed forces and the national police from participating in private security services, but also public officials at any level in active service .61 This is unique, and due to the existence of the so-called battalion of private physical security, which is part of the national police and which hires out police officers as security officers. Criticisms of the battalion are based on the national police being the institution that authorizes, supervises and inspects private security companies, which claim that because they are not authorized to carry firearms, they are at a disadvantage in competing with the battalion.62 84. Except for Chile, ex-members of the police and the armed forces who have been discharged for having committed infractions or crimes are prohibited from providing private security services. 85. Private security activities are generally limited to the sites, buildings and private spaces specified in the contracts.63 This restriction becomes less precise in activities such as 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 Act No. 3.607, art. 3. Ecuador in its regulations on private investigations (Act No. 1181/2008, art. 7). Act No. 2974/1997. Act No. 356/1994, art. 78. Act No. 12.297/1999, art. 8. Act No. 222544/2004, art. 38. See Patricia Arias, “Seguridad privada en América Latina: el lucro and los dilemas de una regulation deficitaria”, FLACSO-Chile (2008), p. 34. Chile, Act No. 3.607, art. 1. 15