A/HRC/45/9/Add.1 another. In the French-speaking part of Switzerland, for example, the police have exclusive authority for the maintenance of law and order and public patrols. In prisons and penal institutions, 15 cantons employ private security companies regularly, while 2 cantons prohibit this practice. The tasks performed in those 15 cantons vary from the provision of security outside the institutions to tasks requiring direct contact with inmates in situations that do not rule out the use of direct force, such as security service support in the case of serious staff shortages or transfers within the institution. 73. At the federal level, the Ordinance on the Use of Private Security Companies by the Federal Government, of 2015,39 defines requirements for such contractors and specifies contractual obligations that must be included when engaging private security services domestically or abroad.40 It makes references to the above-mentioned Federal Act on Private Security Services Provided Abroad. Importantly, among other requirements, private security providers should be applying a code of conduct; have an adequate internal control system and disciplinary measures in place to ensure appropriate behaviour by staff; and provide training appropriate to the protection tasks to be fulfilled, including fundamental rights and the use of force. Nevertheless, the Ordinance does not contain gender-specific clauses, for example in regard to internal policies on gender equality and nondiscrimination. 74. Neither the 2015 Ordinance nor any other regulation clearly defines public security tasks that can be delegated to private contractors. Rather, the delineation of responsibilities appeared to be based on the concept of the State monopoly on the use of force. Unlike the police, private security personnel have no special prerogative to use force. As ordinary citizens, the Swiss Criminal Code restricts and limits their right to use force to legitimate self-defence, including the right to defend property, and persons under their protection, the legitimate defence of others, and necessity. 41 They can also bear arms as can any other citizen, in line with the existing legal requirements and restrictions. 42 75. A 2018 decision of the Federal Supreme Court prohibiting private security personnel from requesting identification of citizens in public spaces was cited as an additional rule to delineate police and private security responsibilities. 43 The case involved personnel from a private security company contracted by a municipality to perform public peace and order functions. A private security guard was fined for requesting and taking a picture of an identification document belonging to a minor. 76. The case illustrates the challenges in ensuring that private security providers do not overstep their authority in performing public functions, particularly as members of the public may not be aware of the respective prerogatives of public and private security actors. Moreover, identification carried by private security personnel varies depending on cantons. Several stakeholders told the Working Group that some private security personnel may not always fully respect the limits of their roles and responsibilities, a challenge that was ascribed to limited and inconsistent training and insufficient vetting. 77. The Working Group considered the specific example of asylum and migration, given the vulnerable situations in which migrants and asylum seekers find themselves and the ensuing risk of human rights abuses. The delegation met with the State Secretariat for Migration – the federal authority responsible for operating federal asylum centres – and visited the federal asylum centre in Kappelen bei Lyss in the Canton of Bern. The delegation met male and female private security personnel working in the centre and spoke to some of the residents. The delegation had requested a visit to the federal asylum centre in 39 40 41 42 43 See www.admin.ch/opc/fr/classified-compilation/20150956/index.html. For security services contracted in complex environments abroad, the Ordinance applies in conjunction with the Federal Act on Private Security Services Provided Abroad; see also paras. 49–52 of the Ordinance. Arts. 15.3 and 17.3 of the Criminal Code; see www.admin.ch/opc/fr/classifiedcompilation/19370083/index.html. See www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/19983208/index.html and www.admin.ch/opc/fr/classified-compilation/20081148/index.html#a48. Decision 1298/2017 of 4 June 2018. 15