A/HRC/39/45 Through its jurisprudence, both in the individual cases that come before it through the regular communications and urgent action procedures, as well as during its country visits, the Working Group has become acutely aware that the safeguards that States are required to put in place to prevent occurrences of torture and ill-treatment also have a crucial role to play in minimizing and even preventing instances of arbitrary detention. 12 60. As an example, a significant proportion of the 94 opinions adopted by the Working Group in 2017 revealed the presence of incommunicado detention in the facts submitted by the source. 13 For the Working Group, incommunicado detention places an individual outside the protection of the law, contrary to the right to be recognized as a person before the law under article 6 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 16 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 14 It also violates his or her right to be brought promptly before a court under article 9 (3) of the Covenant and to challenge the lawfulness of his or her detention before a court under article 9 (4) of the Covenant. 15 Judicial oversight of detention is a fundamental safeguard of personal liberty 16 and is essential in ensuring that detention in fact has a legal basis. On that basis, the Working Group consistently maintains that incommunicado detention constitutes arbitrary detention. 61. However, as the Working Group looks for measures that could effectively prevent and address instances of arbitrary detention that may arise due to incommunicado detention, it is mindful that the Committee against Torture has made it clear that incommunicado detention creates conditions that may lead to violations of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. 17 Equally, the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment has consistently argued that use of incommunicado detention is unlawful and may lead to torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. 18 Thus, in the context of incommunicado detention, the Working Group looks at measures in place to prevent torture with a view to examining the extent to which these could assist in preventing occurrences of arbitrary detention. 62. Similarly, in its jurisprudence the Working Group frequently observes instances of extraction of confessions through ill-treatment or even torture, which are then used in proceedings against the victims who have been subjected to such treatment. 19 For the Working Group, the use of a confession extracted through ill-treatment that is tantamount, if not equivalent, to torture constitutes a breach of article 14 (3) (g) of the Covenant as well as of the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment. The latter instrument, in its principle 21, specifically prohibits taking undue advantage of the situation of detention to compel confessions or incriminating statements. Confessions extracted through such means which have subsequently been admitted by judicial bodies as evidence in proceedings against the victims of such treatment have, in the view of the Working Group, led to situations of arbitrary detention due to denial of the fair trial guarantees.20 63. In its jurisprudence, the Working Group has also consistently argued that extraction of confessions through physical or psychological torture constitutes a violation of the 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 28 See, for example, Human Rights Council resolution 31/31. See opinions Nos. 4/2017, 5/2017, 6/2017, 7/2017, 10/2017, 17/2017, 18/2017, 21/2017, 25/2017, 26/2017, 27/2017, 29/2017, 32/2017, 33/2017, 36/2017, 45/2017, 46/2017, 47/2017, 56/2017, 57/2017, 58/2017, 59/2017, 61/2017, 63/2017, 65/2017, 66/2017, 69/2017, 70/2017, 75/2017, 76/2017, 78/2017, 80/2017, 83/2017, 84/2017, 90/2017, 91/2017, 92/2017, 93/2017 and 94/2017. See, for example, opinions No. 69/2017, para. 38; No. 46/2017, para. 23; and No. 47/2017, para. 25. See, for example, opinions Nos. 79/2017, 46/2017 and 45/2017. See the United Nations Basic Principles and Guidelines on Remedies and Procedures on the Right of Anyone Deprived of Their Liberty to Bring Proceedings Before a Court, para. 3. See, for example, A/54/44, para. 182 (a). See, for example, A/54/426, para. 42; and A/HRC/13/39/Add.5, para. 156. As regards 2017, for example, see opinions Nos. 3/2017, 6/2017, 10/2017, 17/2017, 21/2017, 24/2017, 29/2017, 32/2017, 33/2017, 36/2017, 46/2017, 56/2017, 59/2017, 60/2017, 61/2017, 63/2017, 69/2017, 70/2017, 78/2017, 83/2017, 92/2017 and 93/2017. See, for example, opinions Nos. 48/2016, 3/2017, 6/2017, 29/2017 and 2/2018.