A/HRC/44/24 types of less-lethal weapons and ammunition, which are used to crack down on protesters, including: conducted-energy weapons, such as Taser guns; advanced kinetic impact projectiles, such as attenuating energy projectiles; drones and autonomous systems that employ tear gas and other less-lethal ammunition; pepper balls and pepper-ball launchers; dazzling weapons; acoustic weapons; and malodorants. In 2020, OHCHR issued an advanced edited version of the forthcoming publication United Nations Human Rights Guidance on Less-Lethal Weapons in Law Enforcement. The Guidance was elaborated in collaboration with the Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights and the Centre for Human Rights at the University of Pretoria, South Africa. 43. Under international law, the use of less-lethal weapons and ammunition is subject to strict compliance with the principles of necessity and proportionality. 87 Although they are regarded as less lethal, they still present serious risks of harm,88 and calls have been made for certain less-lethal weapons and ammunition to be prohibited in the management of assemblies.89 One State indicated that its police forces did not have recourse to new lesslethal weapons and sub-munition technology in assemblies.90 Inputs for the present report noted the trauma caused to people and communities by inappropriate use that in some cases has led to injury or death, and the resulting effect of dissuading people from exercising their right of peaceful assembly. 91 The Human Rights Committee has been critical about use of force violations by law enforcement officials in the context of protests in various countries. 92 The Committee of the Rights of the Child expressed concern about physical violence against children, including the disproportionate use of tear gas and pepper spray during forced evictions for urban infrastructure projects,93 and about the use on children of high-frequency ultrasound devices, as well as flash ball devices and Taser guns. 94 The Committee recommended that the concerned State reconsider or ban the use of high-frequency ultrasound and flash ball devices and other harmful devices. 95 44. Similar concerns have also been expressed by special rapporteurs 96 and in the context of the universal periodic review. 97 The Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions has previously observed that advances in technology come with a heightened responsibility for States and others who use them and a need to ensure monitoring and accountability.98 Under international human rights law and principles on the use of force, States must ensure that law enforcement officials are held accountable for any decision to use force, 99 following effective, transparent, prompt, independent and impartial investigations.100 Where an investigation into the use of force by law enforcement officials reveals evidence that a death or injury may have been caused unlawfully, the State should ensure that perpetrators are prosecuted through a judicial process and, if convicted, given appropriate punishment.101 45. Some less-lethal weapons deliver force autonomously or by remote control, which raises complex questions concerning accountability for human rights violations, including the right to life. The Human Rights Committee has recommended that these weapons systems 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 12 Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 36 (2018) on the right to life, para. 14. INCLO, “Unhealed wounds – the faces behind the injuries of crowd-control weapons”. Available at www.inclo.net/projects/unhealed-wounds/. Contribution of Amnesty International. Contribution of Switzerland. Contributions of Omega Research Foundation and the Human Rights House Foundation. CCPR/C/IRQ/CO/5, para. 41; CCPR/C/KOR/CO/4, para. 52; and CCPR/C/MKD/CO/3, para. 19. CRC/C/BRA/CO/2-4, para. 35. CRC/C/FRA/CO/4, para. 47. Ibid., para. 49. www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=25269&LangID=E. A/HRC/30/12, para. 176.223; A/HRC/41/6, paras. 125.55–125.56; A/HRC/39/10, para. 129.73. A/69/265, para. 67. United Nations Human Rights Guidance on Less-Lethal Weapons in Law Enforcement, para. 3.1. The Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016): The Revised United Nations Manual on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.17.XIV.3), para. 20. Ibid., para. 8 (c).