Annual report of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances

The Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances was the first United Nations human rights thematic mechanism to be established with a universal mandate, by the Commission on Human Rights resolution 20 (XXXVI). The mandate was most recently extended by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 27/1.

The primary task of the Working Group is to assist families in determining the fate or whereabouts of their family members who are reportedly disappeared. In that humanitarian capacity, the Working Group serves as a channel of communication between family members of victims of enforced disappearance and other sources reporting cases of disappearances, and the Governments concerned.

Following the adoption of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (General Assembly resolution 47/133), the Working Group was entrusted with monitoring the progress of States in fulfilling their obligations derived from the Declaration. The Human Rights Council, in its resolution 7/12, encouraged the Working Group to provide assistance in the implementation by States of the Declaration and of existing international rules.

The present report contains information on the activities of and communications and cases examined by the Working Group from 19 May 2016 to 17 May 2017. A summary of the decisions on individual cases taken by the Working Group and communications transmitted to the States concerned during the reporting period is presented in a table (see section III).

Since its inception, the Working Group has transmitted a total of 56,363 cases to 112 States. The number of cases under active consideration that have not yet been clarified, closed or discontinued stands at 45,120 in a total of 91 States. During the reporting period, 130 cases were clarified.

During the period under review, the Working Group held three sessions: its 110th session, from 19 to 23 September 2016 (see A/HRC/WGEID/110/1); its 111th session, from 6 to 10 February 2017 (see A/HRC/WGEID/111/1); and its 112th session, from 8 to 17 May 2017 (see A/HRC/WGEID/112/1). The reports on the sessions should be considered complements to the present report.

During the 110th session, Houria Es Slami was confirmed as Chair-Rapporteur of the Working Group and Bernard Duhaime as Vice-Chair. Both had been appointed during the 107th session. Ariel Dulitzky completed his term as member of the Working Group on 30 April 2017. A new member, Luciano Hazan, was appointed in March 2016 to replace Mr. Dulitzky as of 1 May 2017.

On 15 September 2016, the Chair-Rapporteur presented the report of the Working Group covering the period from 16 May 2015 to 18 May 2016, and its addenda, to the Human Rights Council at its thirty-third session, and participated in the interactive dialogue with States.

Between 6 and 10 June 2016, the Vice-Chair represented the Working Group during the twenty-third annual meeting of the special procedure mandate holders of the Human Rights Council.

On 24 October 2016, the Chair-Rapporteur addressed the General Assembly at its seventy-first session and participated in the interactive dialogue with Member States.

The Working Group continues its practice of holding one session per year outside Geneva. It held its 111th session in Seoul. The Working Group is grateful to the Government of the Republic of Korea for the opportunity.

On 17 February 2017, the Vice-Chair participated in a high-level panel of the General Assembly on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of the adoption of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance.

On 23 and 24 March 2017, Mr. Dulitzky carried out a technical visit to Chile to follow up on the implementation of the recommendations made by the Working Group after its visit to Chile in 2012.

During the reporting period, all the members of the Working Group carried out a number of activities on the issue of enforced disappearances, including by participating in conferences, consultations, seminars, training events, workshops and lectures, organized by Governments and civil society organizations.

The Working Group is thankful for the continuous support, including through voluntary contributions, provided by donor States, notably Argentina, France, Japan and the Republic of Korea.

During the period under review, representatives of the Governments of Iraq (111th), Japan (110th, 111th and 112th), Peru (110th), Portugal (112th) and the Republic of Korea (111th) attended the sessions of the Working Group. A number of informal meetings were also held with representatives of other States. The Working Group expresses its appreciation to those Governments for the meetings and emphasizes the importance of cooperation and dialogue.

During the reporting period, the Working Group transmitted 1,094 new cases of enforced disappearance to 36 States.

The Working Group transmitted 260 of the above-mentioned cases under the urgent action procedure¹ to 23 States.

1. The urgent action procedure is used in cases of enforced disappearances that have occurred within three months prior to the receipt of a report by the Working Group. ↩

The Working Group clarified 130 cases in Argentina (1), Bahrain (3), Bangladesh (1), Egypt (88), Jordan (1), Kuwait (1), the Lao People’s Democratic Republic (3), Lebanon (1), Libya (1), Mexico (3), Nigeria (1), the State of Palestine (1), Pakistan (8), the Sudan (5), Turkey (5), Ukraine (1) and the United Arab Emirates (6). Of the 130 cases, 52 were clarified on the basis of information provided by the Governments and 78 on the basis of information provided by the sources.

The Working Group transmitted 21 prompt intervention communications addressing allegations of harassment of and/or threats to human rights defenders and relatives of disappeared persons in Algeria (2), Burundi (1), Egypt (1), El Salvador (1), Ethiopia (2), India (3), Iran (Islamic Republic of) (3), Kenya (1), Mexico (3), Morocco (1), South Sudan (1) and Sri Lanka (2).

It transmitted 17 urgent appeals concerning persons who had been arrested, detained, abducted or otherwise deprived of their liberty or who had been forcibly disappeared or were at risk of disappearance in Bangladesh (1), Chad (1), China (4), Iran (Islamic Republic of) (2), Italy (1), the Lao People’s Democratic Republic (1), Pakistan (1), the Sudan (3), Thailand (1), Turkey (1) and the United Arab Emirates (1).

The Working Group transmitted nine general allegations related to obstacles in the implementation of the Declaration to the Governments of Bangladesh (1), Eritrea (1), Kenya (1), Indonesia (1), Iran (Islamic Republic of) (1), Myanmar (1), Mexico (2) and the Russian Federation (1).

It also transmitted 10 other letters addressing issues related to enforced disappearances to the Governments of Argentina (1), Bolivia (Plurinational State of) (1), Colombia (1), the Democratic Republic of the Congo (1), Libya (1), Mozambique (1), Nigeria (1) and Sri Lanka (2), as well as to the European Union (1).

The Working Group visited Albania from 5 to 12 December 2016 (see A/HRC/36/39/Add.1). The Working Group thanks the Government of Albania for the invitation and for the cooperation extended to it before, during and after its visit. It encourages the Government to fully implement the recommendations contained in its report on the visit.

The Working Group also thanks the Governments of the Gambia, the Sudan and Tajikistan, which have invited it to visit their countries during the reporting period. The visit to the Gambia took place from 12 to 19 June 2017 and the visit to the Sudan is scheduled to take place from 20 to 29 November 2017. The Working Group also thanks the Government of Ukraine, which has in principle accepted its visit for the first semester of 2018.

During the reporting period, the Working Group requested visits to the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Turkmenistan.

In addition, the Working Group reiterated its requests, to which it still has not received a positive response, to visit Bangladesh, Bahrain, Belarus, Burundi, China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Lebanon, Nepal, Nicaragua, the Philippines, the Russian Federation, Rwanda, South Africa, the Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, the United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan and Zimbabwe. The Working Group invites all States that have received a request for a visit by the Working Group to respond favourably to it, in accordance with Human Rights Council resolution 21/4.²

2. See annex I for information on requests made and invitations extended. ↩

The Working Group once again recalls that the Islamic Republic of Iran agreed to a visit by the Working Group in 2004, more than a decade ago, which was delayed at the request of the Government. The Working Group calls upon the Government to set the dates for the visit. Similarly, the Working Group reiterates its regret that it has yet to visit Algeria, in spite of an invitation extended in 2014.

In February 2016, the Government of South Sudan invited the Working Group to visit. However, it did not respond to a subsequent letter from the Working Group sent in April 2016, proposing two dates for a visit to the country in the last quarter of 2017. The visit to Libya, postponed in May 2013 for security reasons, is still pending.

The Working Group has prepared a follow-up report on the implementation of recommendations made following its visits to Chile (see A/HRC/22/45/Add.1) and Spain (see A/HRC/27/49/Add.1). The Working Group thanks both Governments for the cooperation and encourages them to implement the outstanding recommendations. The Working Group is also grateful to the civil society organizations and other stakeholders who provided information for those reports.

On 1 June 2016, the Working Group issued a press release³ welcoming the decision by the Congress of Peru to approve the draft law on the search for disappeared persons.

3. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=20046&LangID=E. ↩

On 15 July 2016, the Working Group, jointly with other mandate holders, welcomed the decision of the Supreme Court of El Salvador to declare unconstitutional the amnesty law of 1993, which allowed crimes against humanity and war crimes, as well as serious or systematic violations of human rights and international humanitarian law committed during the internal armed conflict, to be treated with impunity.⁴

4. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=20275&LangID=E. ↩

On 19 August 2016, the Working Group issued a press release, jointly with other mandate holders, urging the Government of Turkey to uphold its obligations under international human rights law, even during the state of emergency declared after the attempted coup.⁵

5. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=20394&LangID=E. ↩

On 23 August 2016, the Working Group issued a press release, jointly with other mandate holders, urging the Government of Bangladesh to annul the death sentence against a senior member of the Jamaat-e-Islami opposition party, Mir Quasem Ali, and to retry him in compliance with international standards. They also expressed alarm at reports that Mr. Ali’s son, who was also a member of his legal defence team, Mir Ahmed Bin Quasem, was abducted from his home on 9 August 2016 by Bangladeshi security forces, two weeks before his father’s review hearing.⁶

6. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=20403&LangID=E. ↩

On 26 August 2016, the Working Group issued a press release, jointly with the Committee on Enforced Disappearances, on the occasion of the International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances, calling on States to prevent and eradicate enforced disappearances, including short-term enforced disappearances, and to ensure that relatives of persons deprived of their liberty are informed accurately and promptly of their detention.⁷

7. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=20416&LangID=E. ↩

On 15 September 2016, on the occasion of the presentation by the Chair-Rapporteur of the Working Group’s annual report to the Human Rights Council, the Working Group issued a press release warning States that enforced disappearances were on the rise and expressing deep concern and frustration for what it defined as “a very frightening trend”.⁸ The Working Group also issued separate press releases in relation to its reports on the visits to Peru,⁹ Sri Lanka¹⁰ and Turkey.¹¹

8. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=20505&LangID=E. ↩
9. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=20501&LangID=E. ↩
10. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=20499&LangID=E. ↩
11. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=20500&LangID=E. ↩

On 23 September 2016, at the conclusion of its 110th session, the Working Group issued a statement.¹²

12. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=20578&LangID=E. ↩

On 10 October 2016, the Working Group issued a press release, jointly with other mandate holders, urging the Ethiopian authorities to end their violent crackdown on peaceful protests and calling upon the Government to allow an international commission of inquiry to investigate the protests held and the violence used against peaceful demonstrators.¹³

13. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=20663&LangID=E. ↩

On 19 October 2016, the Working Group issued a press release, jointly with other mandate holders, calling on the Government of India to immediately release human rights defender Khurram Parvez, who had been arrested in September 2016 for alleged activities against the public order. Mr. Parvez is the coordinator of the Jammu Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society and the Chair of the Asian Federation against Involuntary Disappearances.¹⁴ He was subsequently released on 30 November 2016.

14. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=20697&LangID=E. ↩

On 24 October 2016, a press release was issued on the occasion of a presentation by the Chair-Rapporteur of the Working Group to the General Assembly, in which States were called upon to place the eradication of enforced disappearance at the top of their agenda and engage seriously in the fight against enforced disappearance.¹⁵

15. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=20752&LangID=E. ↩

On 12 December 2016, the Working Group issued a press release¹⁶ and a statement,¹⁷ at the conclusion of its visit to Albania, calling upon the Government to adopt a comprehensive State policy that fully recognizes past crimes, including enforced disappearances, and adequately deals with all aspects related to truth, justice, reparation, memory and guarantees of non-repetition.

16. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=21017&LangID=E. ↩
17. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=21016&LangID=E. ↩

On 20 December 2016, the Working Group issued a press release commending the decision of the States parties to the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance to extend the mandate of the Committee on Enforced Disappearances.¹⁸

18. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=21055&LangID=E. ↩

On 6 February 2017, the Working Group issued a press release, jointly with other mandate holders, on the situation of human rights defenders in Burundi, notably the allegation of a steep increase in cases of enforced disappearances.¹⁹

19. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=21145&LangID=E. ↩

On 14 February 2017, at the conclusion of its 111th session, the Working Group issued a statement.²⁰

20. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=21176&LangID=E. ↩

On 17 February 2017, the Working Group issued a press release calling upon the Governments of Kenya and South Sudan to reveal the fate of two South Sudanese men who had been abducted in Kenya.²¹

21. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=21193&LangID=E. ↩

On 24 February 2017, the Working Group, jointly with other mandate holders, issued a press release calling upon the Government of Bangladesh to urgently halt the increasing number of enforced disappearances in the country.²²

22. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=21220&LangID=E. ↩

On 28 March 2017, the Working Group, jointly with other mandate holders, issued a press release urging the Government of the United Arab Emirates to immediately reveal the whereabouts of renowned human rights defender Ahmed Mansour.²³

23. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=21449&LangID=E. ↩

The Working Group has presented a specific thematic report on the issue of enforced disappearances in the context of migration (A/HRC/36/39/Add.2).

During its 105th session, and in its 2015 annual report, the Working Group announced that it would address diverse forms of enforced disappearances in the context of migration to determine the cause of the problem and to specify the obligations of the States to assist the victims. A number of preliminary observations were already included in its 2016 annual report (see A/HCR/33/51, paras. 46-80). On 5 February 2017, an expert meeting was held in Seoul, on the sidelines of the 111th session of the Working Group. In addition, a number of written contributions were received from various stakeholders, including States, in response to a questionnaire sent in December 2016.²⁴ The Working Group is grateful to the States, United Nations agencies, non-governmental organizations and individuals who participated in the process.

24. The responding States were El Salvador, Germany, Ireland, Japan, Kazakhstan, Mexico, Morocco, Portugal, Serbia, Sweden and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of). Written contributions were also received from the following organizations: Groupe antiraciste de défense et d’accompagnement des étrangers et migrants; Fundación para la Justicia y el Estado Democrático de Derecho; Regional Mixed Migration Secretariat; and Alternative Espace Citoyen. Kimio Yakushiji, on behalf of the Committee on Enforced Disappearances, also contributed. ↩

The phenomenon of enforced disappearance of migrants is a modern-day reality and should not be ignored or underestimated. The increasingly precarious movements of migrants, including through long and perilous journeys associated, among other things, with the often increasingly rigid migratory policies of States focused on deterrence, have created a situation which exposes migrants to heightened risks of becoming victims of human rights violations, including enforced disappearances.

As outlined in the report, there is a direct link between enforced disappearance and migration, either because individuals migrate as a consequence of the threat or risk of being subjected to enforced disappearances in their country or because they disappear during their migratory journey or in the country of destination. This may occur either as a result of abduction for political or other reasons, or in the context of detention or deportation processes or as a consequence of smuggling and/or trafficking. However, States and the international community as a whole do not seem to be devoting the necessary attention to this issue. In addition, owing to both its nature and its transnational character States are turning a blind eye and prefer to transfer the blame elsewhere, be it to another State or to a criminal group.

Where the disappearances of migrants are carried out primarily by non-State actors but with the direct or indirect involvement of State authorities, those acts would clearly be characterized as enforced disappearances. There are also other cases in which migrants disappear as an involuntary but direct consequence of the actions of the State, for instance in the case of pushback, at land or at sea. While these may not, strictly speaking, be enforced disappearances, they may nevertheless trigger State responsibility in the context of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance.

Thus, in view of the gravity and complexity of this phenomenon, it is essential that each State take this problem seriously and urgently strengthen measures to prevent and combat it at the national level. In addition, given its transnational character, States should reinforce cooperation with other States as well as with relevant international organizations at the regional and global levels.

In the light of the foregoing, the Working Group makes the following recommendations to States.

General Migration as a consequence of enforced disappearance

States should consider the risk or threat of being subjected to enforced disappearance as a form of persecution falling within the scope of the principle of non-refoulement and grant refugee status to persons who migrate to flee from such conduct, while also taking all necessary measures to ensure that they are not the subject of refoulement.

States should:
(a) Gather, compile and systematize all the information in relation to all individuals who go missing in, or transiting through, their countries. This information should also be systematically shared with bordering countries as well as with relevant international and/or regional organizations;
(b) Intensify cooperation — bilateral and multilateral — with other States and international organizations in the areas of identification, search, data collection, prevention, investigation and prosecution.

In accordance with article 8 of the Declaration, States should prohibit, in both in legislation and practice:
(a) The expulsion, return (refoulement) or extradition of migrants to another State where there are substantial grounds to believe that they would be in danger of enforced disappearance. Any return must be the subject of careful individual assessment and follow due process, including the right to challenge the decision to expel/return. For the purpose of determining whether there are grounds for such challenges, the competent authorities should take into account all relevant considerations, including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights, in accordance with article 8 (2) of the Declaration;
(b) The pushback of migrants to any country where they would be in danger of enforced disappearance.

In this connection, States should also:
(a) Carefully consider, when designing them, the impact that migration regulations, policies and practices may have, and in particular assess the possible consequence of compelling migrants to resort to smuggling networks and thereby falling prey to trafficking networks, thus contributing to heightened risks of becoming victims of human rights violations, including enforced disappearances;
(b) Better monitor newly identified migratory routes — both by land and by sea — with a view to saving lives and upholding human rights in order to avoid as much as possible the disappearances of migrants during their journey;
(c) Take all possible measures to sanction criminal organizations which abuse or exploit migrants, notably trafficking networks, and adequately investigate any allegation of involvement, collusion or acquiescence of State authorities in these criminal acts, which may end in the disappearance of migrants;
(d) Strive to end immigration detention and never detain migrant children based on their status or that of their parents. If detention of adult migrants is absolutely necessary as a measure of last resort, proportionate and justified in law, States should hold migrants deprived of liberty in an officially recognized place of detention and make sure that their detention is formally registered, including with accurate information on their detention and place or places of detention, and independently monitored;
(e) In all circumstances allow migrant detainees to communicate with their relatives and lawyers or representatives, and always inform them of their right to communicate with the consular authorities of their country of origin;
(f) Formally document — and monitor, when possible — all returns of migrants and ensure that they are carried out in accordance with international standards in order to avoid disappearances during those processes, including temporary disappearances;
(g) When deprived of liberty, release all migrants in a manner permitting reliable verification that they have actually been released and, further, have been released in conditions in which their physical integrity and ability to fully exercise fully their rights are assured.

Search for disappeared migrants

States should:
(a) Take all necessary measures to search for and locate disappeared migrants by using all means at their disposal, including forensic investigative resources, and incorporate ante-mortem information in a centralized database;
(b) Investigate whether clandestine graves or other places where bodies may be concealed exist in migratory transit areas, and establish a register of found corpses, documenting the circumstances of the discovery;
(c) Respect international standards for all exhumations of mass graves of migrants and the identification processes undertaken thereafter;
(d) Consider facilitating, including by the issuance of visas, the arrival of relatives of the disappeared implicated in the search for their loved ones.

Investigation, criminalization and prosecution

States should:
(a) Investigate all cases of potential enforced disappearance as such from the outset and not exclude, a priori, the fact that they may in fact be enforced disappearances;
(b) Carry out all investigative efforts with the cooperation of the authorities of all States involved, as is normally the case for all criminal acts having a transnational character;
(c) Criminalize all acts of enforced disappearance, including enforced disappearances of migrants, which should be punished by appropriate penalties, taking into account their extreme seriousness;
(d) Take any appropriate action to bring to justice all persons presumed responsible for an act of enforced disappearance of migrants when they are found to be within their jurisdiction or under their control, unless those persons have been extradited to another State wishing to exercise jurisdiction.

Protection and right to an effective remedy

States should:
(a) Ensure a prompt and effective judicial remedy as a means of determining the whereabouts or state of health of migrants whose whereabouts are unknown;
(b) Ensure the right of migrants to have recourse — with their informed consent — to the protection and assistance of the consular or diplomatic authorities of their State of origin if their rights are violated, including the right of the families of disappeared migrants to be assisted in the search for their whereabouts;
(c) Promptly initiate an appropriate investigation if a mass grave of migrants is discovered and refrain from taking any measures that could derail or delay the investigation;
(d) Provide redress and ensure the right to adequate compensation, including the means for as complete a rehabilitation as possible, for all victims. In the event of the death of a migrant as a result of an act of enforced disappearance, the family members should also be entitled to compensation.

Given the transnational nature of the enforced disappearance of migrants, States should carry out all investigative efforts, both for the search for the migrants and for the prosecution of those presumed responsible, duly cooperating with the authorities of all States involved and with relevant international organizations. III. Decisions on individual cases taken by the Working Group and communications transmitted to the States concerned during the reporting period²⁵ Countries Number of outstanding cases at the beginning of the period under review Cases transmitted to the Government during the reporting period Cases clarified during the period under review by: Number of cases of possible clarification by Government (6-month rule) Number of outstanding cases at the end of the period under review Communications sent during the period under review Communications received during the period under review Prompt intervention letter Urgent appeal General allegation Other letter Response to prompt intervention letter Response to urgent appeal Response to general allegation Response to other letter Urgent actions Standard cases Government Sources Afghanistan Albania Algeria 3 139 3 179 Angola Argentina²⁶ 3 244 3 241 Bahrain Bangladesh Belarus Bhutan²⁷ Bolivia (Plurinational State of) 25 Urgent actions are cases of enforced disappearances that have occurred within three months prior to the receipt of a report by the Working Group; or cases of enforced disappearances that have occurred prior to the three-month limit, but within one year prior to the receipt of a report by the Working Group, provided that there is a link with a case that occurred within the three-month period. Standard cases are cases of enforced disappearances that have occurred prior to the three-month limit. Prompt intervention letters concern cases of intimidation, persecution or reprisal against families of disappeared persons, witnesses, lawyers, human rights defenders and other individuals concerned with disappearances. Urgent appeals concern allegations of enforced disappearances; or allegations regarding persons deprived of liberty who are at risk of being disappeared. General allegations concern alleged obstacles encountered in the implementation of the Declaration. 26 The Working Group decided at its 110th session to transfer three cases from Argentina to Uruguay. 27 The Working Group decided at its 111th session to transfer five cases from Bhutan to India. Countries Number of outstanding cases at the beginning of the period under review Cases transmitted to the Government during the reporting period Cases clarified during the period under review by: Number of cases of possible clarification by Government (6-month rule) Number of outstanding cases at the end of the period under review Communications sent during the period under review Communications received during the period under review Prompt intervention letter Urgent appeal General allegation Other letter Response to prompt intervention letter Response to urgent appeal Response to general allegation Response to other letter Urgent actions Standard cases Government Sources Brazil Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Central African Republic Chad Chile China 3* Colombia Congo Democratic People’s Republic of Korea Democratic Republic of the Congo Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt28 28 The Working Group determined during its 110th session that two cases were duplicates and subsequently expunged them from the records. Countries Number of outstanding cases at the beginning of the period under review Cases transmitted to the Government during the reporting period Cases clarified during the period under review by: Number of cases of possible clarification by Government (6-month rule) Number of outstanding cases at the end of the period under review Communications sent during the period under review Communications received during the period under review Prompt intervention letter Urgent appeal General allegation Other letter Response to prompt intervention letter Response to urgent appeal Response to general allegation Response to other letter Urgent actions Standard cases Government Sources El Salvador 2 282 2 282 Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Ethiopia France Gambia Greece Guatemala 2 897 2 897 Guinea Guyana Haiti Honduras India²⁹ Indonesia Iran (Islamic Republic of ) Iraq 16 413 16 416 Israel Italy Jordan 29 The Working Group decided at its 111th session to transfer five cases from Bhutan to India. Countries Number of outstanding cases at the beginning of the period under review Cases transmitted to the Government during the reporting period Cases clarified during the period under review by: Number of cases of possible clarification by Government (6-month rule) Number of outstanding cases at the end of the period under review Communications sent during the period under review Communications received during the period under review Prompt intervention letter Urgent appeal General allegation Other letter Response to prompt intervention letter Response to urgent appeal Response to general allegation Response to other letter Urgent actions Standard cases Government Sources Kenya Kuwait Lao People’s Democratic Republic Lebanon Libya Malaysia Maldives Mauritania Mexico Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Nicaragua Nigeria Oman Pakistan Peru 2 365 2 365 Philippines Republic of Korea Countries Number of outstanding cases at the beginning of the period under review Cases transmitted to the Government during the reporting period Cases clarified during the period under review by: Number of cases of possible clarification by Government (6-month rule) Number of outstanding cases at the end of the period under review Communications sent during the period under review Communications received during the period under review Prompt intervention letter Urgent appeal General allegation Other letter Response to prompt intervention letter Response to urgent appeal Response to general allegation Response to other letter Urgent actions Standard cases Government Sources Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Seychelles Somalia South Africa South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka 5 758 5 859 Sudan Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tunisia Turkey³⁰ Turkmenistan Uganda 30 The Working Group determined during its 111th session that one case was a duplicate and subsequently expunged it from the records. Countries Number of outstanding cases at the beginning of the period under review Cases transmitted to the Government during the reporting period Cases clarified during the period under review by: Number of cases of possible clarification by Government (6-month rule) Number of outstanding cases at the end of the period under review Communications sent during the period under review Communications received during the period under review Prompt intervention letter Urgent appeal General allegation Other letter Response to prompt intervention letter Response to urgent appeal Response to general allegation Response to other letter Urgent actions Standard cases Government Sources Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States of America Uruguay³¹ Uzbekistan Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) Viet Nam Yemen Zimbabwe State of Palestine 31 The Working Group decided at its 110th session to transfer three cases from Argentina to Uruguay.

25. Urgent actions are cases of enforced disappearances that have occurred within three months prior to the receipt of a report by the Working Group; or cases of enforced disappearances that have occurred prior to the three-month limit, but within one year prior to the receipt of a report by the Working Group, provided that there is a link with a case that occurred within the three-month period. Standard cases are cases of enforced disappearances that have occurred prior to the three-month limit. Prompt intervention letters concern cases of intimidation, persecution or reprisal against families of disappeared persons, witnesses, lawyers, human rights defenders and other individuals concerned with disappearances. Urgent appeals concern allegations of enforced disappearances; or allegations regarding persons deprived of liberty who are at risk of being disappeared. General allegations concern alleged obstacles encountered in the implementation of the Declaration. ↩
26. The Working Group decided at its 110th session to transfer three cases from Argentina to Uruguay. ↩
27. The Working Group decided at its 111th session to transfer five cases from Bhutan to India. ↩
29. The Working Group decided at its 111th session to transfer five cases from Bhutan to India. ↩
30. The Working Group determined during its 111th session that one case was a duplicate and subsequently expunged it from the records. ↩
31. The Working Group decided at its 110th session to transfer three cases from Argentina to Uruguay. ↩

In addition to the observations formulated in its post-session documents (see paragraph 6 above), the Working Group makes the following country-specific observations based on the cooperation received and on significant developments regarding its mandate during the reporting period.

The Working Group reiterates its disappointment (see A/HRC/30/38, para. 58, and A/HRC/33/51, para. 82) that, in spite of an official communication received in February 2014 in which the Government invited the Working Group to visit Algeria during the second semester of 2014, it has not accepted the different dates offered by the Working Group. The Working Group continues to hope that it can soon be allowed to conduct a visit to the country.

The Working Group is concerned by the fact that it continues to receive new reports of cases of alleged enforced disappearances in Bangladesh (see paragraph 46 above) and by the lack of replies to the cases and communications transmitted. The Working Group stresses that, as provided for in article 7 of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, no circumstances whatsoever may be invoked to justify enforced disappearances and that, according to article 10 (2), accurate information on the detention of such persons and their place or places of detention, including transfers, should be made promptly available to their family members, their counsel or to any other persons having a legitimate interest in the information.

The Working Group reiterates its regret that no information has been received from the Government in connection with two general allegations transmitted on 4 May 2011 concerning the alleged frequent use of enforced disappearance as a tool by law enforcement agencies, paramilitary and armed forces to detain and even extrajudicially execute individuals (see A/HRC/22/45 and Corr.1, para. 33, and A/HRC/30/38, para. 61); and on 9 March 2016, concerning the reportedly alarming rise in the number of cases of enforced disappearance in the country (see A/HRC/WGEID/108/1, para. 6). The Working Group invites the Government to reply to its last general allegation, transmitted on 22 February 2017, concerning allegations of grave human rights abuses and violations committed by the Bangladesh Security and Intelligence Forces as well as Law Enforcement Authorities (see A/HRC/WGEID/111/1, para. 24 and annex II).

On 12 March 2013, the Working Group requested an invitation to visit the country. No response has been received yet from the Government, in spite of reminders sent on 27 October 2014, 27 November 2015 and 18 November 2016. The Working Group hopes that a positive reply will be received soon.

The Working Group continues to be concerned (see A/HRC/33/51, paras. 85-86) about the situation of violence and instability in Burundi, which may facilitate the occurrence of enforced disappearances. It reiterates article 7 of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, which provides that no circumstances whatsoever may be invoked to justify enforced disappearances.

On 27 May 2009, the Working Group requested an invitation to visit the country. The Working Group regrets the reply received on 27 March 2017 declining to issue an invitation.

The Working Group has prepared a follow-up report on the implementation of recommendations made after its visit to Chile (A/HRC/22/45/Add.1). The Working Group thanks the Government of Chile for cooperating with it in producing the follow-up report, part of which was on a technical visit carried out by a member on 23 and 24 March 2017 (see paragraph 13 above). It hopes that the recommendations contained in the report will be duly implemented.

The Working Group is concerned about the fact that it continues to receive reports of individuals detained in China who have been placed under investigation (see A/HRC/WGEID/107/1, para. 24, A/HRC/WGEID/108/1, para. 28, A/HRC/WGEID/111/1, para. 30, and A/HRC/WGEID/112/1, para. 26) but whose exact whereabouts remain unknown. The Working Group reiterates that such cases of secret detention are a form of enforced disappearance and urges the Government of China to disclose the fate and whereabouts of all detained persons, regardless of the nature of the charges against them. The Working Group reiterates that accurate information on the detention of persons deprived of their liberty and their place or places of detention, including transfers, should be made promptly available to their family members, their counsel or to any other persons having a legitimate interest in the information (article 10 (2) of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance).

The Working Group is also concerned by reports of the continued practice of repatriating individuals who have been detained by the Chinese authorities after fleeing the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Persons returned to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea risk suffering gross human rights violations, including enforced disappearance (see A/HRC/WGEID/112/1, para. 29). The Working Group recalls article 8 (1) of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, according to which no State shall expel, return (refouler) or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds to believe that he or she would be in danger of enforced disappearance.

On 19 February 2013, the Working Group requested an invitation to visit the country. No response has been received yet from the Government, in spite of reminders sent on 2 September 2013, 28 October 2014, 27 November 2015 and 18 November 2016. The Working Group hopes that a positive reply will be received soon.

The Working Group is concerned about the lack of cooperation demonstrated by the Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea through the identical replies received in recent years in relation to the transmitted cases. The Working Group is concerned in particular by the fact that the Government, instead of cooperating with the Working Group in relation to the very serious allegations of grave and systematic enforced disappearances in the country, has accused the Working Group of being partial and of being involved in an alleged political plot against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. The Working Group firmly reiterates that it operates while maintaining the highest levels of objectivity, independence and impartiality.

The Working Group reiterates its previous call to the Security Council to consider referring the situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to the International Criminal Court (see A/HRC/27/49, para. 72).

On 22 May 2015, the Working Group requested an invitation to visit the country and sent a reminder on 18 November 2016. It hopes that a positive reply will be received soon.

The Working Group is gravely concerned about the situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, particularly in the Kasaï regions, which may facilitate the occurrence of enforced disappearances. It emphasizes that, as provided in article 7 of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, no circumstances whatsoever may be invoked to justify enforced disappearances.

On 17 May 2017, the Working Group requested an invitation to visit the country. It hopes that a positive reply will be received soon.

The Working Group thanks the Government for its high number of replies, which continue to demonstrate the Government’s commitment to engaging with the Working Group and have allowed it to clarify a high number of cases. It remains concerned, however, about the fact that, during the reporting period, it has had to transmit to the Government 101 new cases under its urgent action procedure (see A/HRC/WGEID/110/1, paras. 38-45, A/HRC/WGEID/111/1, paras. 40-49, and A/HRC/WGEID/112/1, paras. 38-45). It reiterates that accurate information on the detention of persons deprived of their liberty and their place or places of detention, including transfers, should be made promptly available to their family members, their counsel or to any other persons having a legitimate interest in the information (article 10 (2) of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance).

On 30 June 2011, the Working Group requested an invitation to visit the country. No response has been received yet from the Government, in spite of reminders sent on 8 November 2012, 18 September 2013, 27 October 2014, 27 November 2015 and 18 November 2016. The Working Group hopes that a positive reply will be received soon.

The Working Group regrets its total lack of interaction with the Government of Eritrea. It also notes with concern the general allegation transmitted on 21 March 2017 in relation to the alleged widespread and systematic human rights violations, including enforced disappearances, committed throughout the country over the past 25 years (see A/HRC/WGEID/111/1, para. 52 and annex II).

The Working Group endorses the call made by the commission of inquiry on human rights in Eritrea for the Security Council to consider referring the situation in Eritrea to the International Criminal Court (see A/HRC/32/47, para. 132).

The Working Group commends the Government of the Gambia for having the political will to address past gross violations of human rights, including enforced disappearances. The Working Group reiterates its support for the steps already taken and encourages the authorities to take heed of the preliminary observations made at the end of the Working Group’s visit in June 2017.³²

32. See www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=21771&LangID=E. ↩

The Working Group stresses that all measures dealing with truth, justice and reparations should be designed and implemented simultaneously and in consultation with the relatives of the disappeared and civil society representatives. In particular, it stresses that such measures should include establishing a truth and reconciliation commission, which is being discussed at the governmental level, vetting the security sector for compliance with human rights standards and strengthening the efficiency and independence of the judiciary.

The Working Group is concerned at the information received concerning cases of individuals who have disappeared from within the prison system in the Islamic Republic of Iran, including after their detention in Evin Prison. The Working Group stresses that, as provided for in article 10 (2) of the Declaration on the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance, accurate information on the detention of any persons deprived of liberty and their place or places of detention, including transfers, should be made promptly available to their family members, their counsel or to any other persons having a legitimate interest in the information.

The Working Group also remains concerned at information received concerning acts of harassment and intimidation against persons who have reported cases of enforced disappearances or who have actively campaigned to learn the truth about their disappeared relatives and sought justice for them. The Working Group emphasizes that, according to article 13 (3) of the Declaration on the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance, “steps shall be taken to ensure that all involved in the investigation, including the complainant, counsel, witnesses and those conducting the investigation, are protected against ill-treatment, intimidation or reprisal”.

The Working Group once again recalls that the Islamic Republic of Iran agreed to a visit by the Working Group in 2004, which was delayed at the request of the Government. The visit has not taken place yet, in spite of reminders sent on 20 July 2009, 16 August 2010, 18 August 2011, 8 November 2012, 18 September 2013, 28 October 2014, 27 November 2015 and 18 November 2016. The Working Group calls upon the Government to set the dates for a visit as soon as possible.

The Working Group reiterates its concern at the lack of replies from the Government to its communications, including two general allegations transmitted on 30 September 2014 in relation to enforced disappearances and other human rights violations reportedly carried out by the Anti-Terrorism Police Unit (see A/HRC/WGEID/104/1, paras. 71-78, and A/HRC/30/38, para. 76); and on 4 March 2016 in relation to alleged human rights violations, including the enforced disappearance of terrorism suspects, in the context of high-handed security measures, such as the “Usalama Watch” security operation carried out in April 2014 (see A/HRC/WGEID/108/1, para. 6). The Working Group notes with concern the general allegation transmitted on 1 June 2017, related to reports of enforced disappearances of notably young Muslims in the coastal region of the country (see A/HRC/WGEID/112/1, para. 59 and annex II). The Working Group reiterates that, as provided in article 7 of the Declaration on the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance, no circumstances whatsoever may be invoked to justify enforced disappearances.

On 19 February 2013, the Working Group requested an invitation to visit the country. No response yet has been received from the Government, in spite of a reminders sent on 2 September 2013, 28 October 2014, 27 November 2015 and 18 November 2016. The Working Group hopes that a positive reply will be received soon.

The Working Group is concerned about the volatile situation in Libya, which may facilitate the occurrence of enforced disappearances. The Working Group is particularly concerned about the activities of a number of criminal groups and militias who seem to operate in some areas with the acquiescence, if not the overt support, of the Government. It emphasizes that, as provided in article 2 of the Declaration on the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance, no State shall practise, permit or tolerate enforced disappearances.

The Working Group welcomes the recent approval by the Senate of a general law on enforced disappearances. It urges the Government to redouble its efforts to finalize its approval as soon as possible, while noting at the same time that the bill has some gaps, including in relation to the proposed system of search.

The Working Group is concerned about the consistent and reliable reports of grave and systematic human rights violations in Rakhine State, including enforced disappearances. It emphasizes that, as provided in article 2 of the Declaration on the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance, no State shall practise, permit or tolerate enforced disappearances and that, according to article 7 of the Declaration, no circumstances whatsoever may be invoked to justify enforced disappearances.

In that respect, the Working Group notes with concern the general allegation transmitted on 9 June 2017, related to allegations of enforced disappearances following security operations in northern Rakhine State (see A/HRC/WGEID/112/1, paras. 72-73, and annex II) and requests that a reply be provided soon.

The Working Group was pleased to learn about the renewal, on 8 February 2017, of the mandate of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons. It regrets, however, that the extension is for just one additional year. The Working Group calls upon the Government of Nepal to extend those mandates further, in order to guarantee the effective planning and functioning of the Commissions and to ensure significant progress on crucial aspects of their mandates, such as truth-telling initiatives, the study of the nature and patterns of the serious human rights violations, including enforced disappearances, the identification of perpetrators and the recommendations on reparations to victims and on institutional reform.

The Working Group is also aware that in 2015 the Commission of Investigation on Enforced Disappeared Persons drafted a bill criminalizing enforced disappearances. That piece of legislation has not, however, been tabled in Parliament yet. The Working Group urges the Government of Nepal to accelerate the process of drafting the bill criminalizing enforced disappearances, in consultation with relevant stakeholders, including victims and civil society organizations, and to adopt such legislation promptly. It recalls that, according to article 4 (1) of the Declaration on the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance, all acts of enforced disappearance should be offences under criminal law punishable by appropriate penalties which shall take into account their extreme seriousness and that article 18 (1) provides that persons who have or are alleged to have committed enforced disappearances should not benefit from any special amnesty law or similar measures that might have the effect of exempting them from any criminal proceedings or sanction.

On 22 November 2016, the Working Group reiterated its request to visit the country, initially made in 2006. No response has been received yet from the Government; the Working Group hopes that a positive reply will be received soon.

The Working Group is concerned about the fact that, during the reporting period, it has transmitted to the Government 119 new cases under its urgent action procedure (see A/HRC/WGEID/110/1, paras. 82-94, A/HRC/WGEID/111/1, para. 99, and A/HRC/WGEID/112/1, para. 76). The Working Group thanks the Government for the replies dated 15 July 2016 and 17 February 2017 providing information on a large number of cases, which demonstrate the Government’s commitment to engaging with the Working Group. However, it reiterates the importance of respecting the following provisions of the Declaration on the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance:
(a) No State shall practise, permit or tolerate enforced disappearances (art. 2 (1));
(b) No circumstances whatsoever may be invoked to justify enforced disappearances (art. 7);
(c) Accurate information on the detention of persons deprived of their liberty and their place or places of detention, including transfers, should be made promptly available to their family members, their counsel or to any other persons having a legitimate interest in the information (art. 10 (2)).

The Working Group encourages the Government to implement the recommendations contained in the follow-up report on the implementation of the recommendations made by the Working Group after its visit to Pakistan in 2012 (see A/HRC/33/51/Add.4). It also reiterates its request to conduct a follow-up visit (see A/HRC/33/51/Add.7, para. 38).

The Working Group is concerned about the situation in the Philippines, notably in relation to the alleged high number of extrajudicial killings carried out in the context of the “war on drugs”, which may enable the occurrence of enforced disappearances. It emphasizes that, as provided in article 7 of the Declaration on the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance, no circumstances whatsoever may be invoked to justify enforced disappearances.

On 3 April 2008, the Working Group requested an invitation to visit the country. No response has been received yet from the Government, in spite of reminders sent on 16 August 2010, 18 August 2011, 18 September 2013, 28 October 2014, 27 November 2015 and 18 November 2016. The Working Group hopes that a positive reply will be received soon.

With respect to the general allegation and cases recently transmitted (see A/HRC/WGEID/110/1, paras. 4 and 109, A/HRC/WGEID/111, para. 109, and A/HRC/WGEID/112, para. 83), the Working Group hopes that a substantive reply will be received soon.

On 2 November 2006, the Working Group requested an invitation to visit the country. No positive response has been received yet in spite of reminders sent on 4 June 2008, 20 July 2009, 16 August 2010, 18 August 2011, 8 November 2012, 2 September 2013, 27 October 2014, 27 November 2015 and 18 November 2016. The Working Group hopes that a positive reply will be received as soon as possible.

The Working Group has prepared a follow-up report on the implementation of the recommendations made by the Working Group after its visit to Spain (A/HRC/27/49/Add.1). The Working Group thanks the Government of Spain for cooperating with it in producing the follow-up report. It hopes that the recommendations contained in the report will be duly implemented.

The Working Groups regrets the lack of progress in the establishment and effective functioning of the Office of Missing Persons and urges the Government to take fully into account the recommendations made after the visit carried out in November 2015 concerning the Office (see A/HRC/33/51/Add.2, paras. 79-80).

The Working Group continues to be gravely concerned about the situation in the Syrian Arab Republic, which facilitates the occurrence of enforced disappearances. It reiterates article 7 of the Declaration on the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance, which provides that no circumstances whatsoever may be invoked to justify enforced disappearances.

The Working Group reiterates its call to the Security Council to consider referring the situation in the Syrian Arab Republic to the International Criminal Court (see A/HRC/27/49, para. 99, and A/HRC/33/51, para. 103).

On 19 September 2011, the Working Group requested an invitation to visit the country. No response has been received yet from the Government, in spite of reminders sent on 2 September 2013, 27 October 2014, 27 November 2015 and 18 November 2016. The Working Group hopes that a positive reply will be received soon.

On 30 June 2011, the Working Group requested an invitation to visit the country. No response has been received yet from the Government, in spite of reminders sent on 8 November 2012, 2 September 2013, 28 October 2014, 27 November 2015 and 18 November 2016. The Working Group hopes that a positive reply will be received soon.

The Working Group reiterates the recommendation formulated after its visits in March 2016, notably to adopt immediately a comprehensive policy to address disappearances, which would include the creation of an extrajudicial mechanism specifically devoted to the search of those who have disappeared, and to ensure the proper preservation and investigation of existing burial sites (see A/HRC/33/51/Add.1, paras. 71-72).

On 13 September 2013, the Working Group requested an invitation to visit the country. No response has been received yet from the Government, in spite of reminders sent on 27 October 2014, 27 November 2015 and 18 November 2016. The Working Group hopes that a positive reply will be received soon.

The Working Group continues to be concerned about the situation in Yemen, which may facilitate the occurrence of enforced disappearances (see A/HRC/33/51, para. 109). It reiterates article 7 of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, which provides that no circumstances whatsoever may be invoked to justify enforced disappearances.

The Working Group is seriously concerned that the number of enforced disappearances continues to be unacceptably high worldwide. A demonstration of this sad reality is the fact that, during the reporting period, the Working Group transmitted 1,094 newly reported cases of disappearance to 36 States. It used the urgent action procedure in 260 of those cases, which allegedly occurred within the three months preceding the receipt of the report by the Working Group.

In spite of the large number of cases, underreporting remains a major problem. More assistance should be provided to family members and members of civil society to enable them to report cases to the Working Group and, more importantly, to keep working on enforced disappearance issues.

The Working Group cannot discharge its mandate without the cooperation of States, particularly in providing information to the families about the fate or whereabouts of disappeared persons. In that respect, the Working Group welcomes the fact that a high number of States continued cooperating with it by providing regular and substantive replies. Other States considerably improved the quality of their replies by including more detailed and pertinent information. At the same time, the Working Group remains concerned that many States have never replied to the Working Group or have provided responses that do not contain any relevant information or are of a formal and/or procedural nature only, de facto refusing to cooperate. The Working Group urges all States to fulfil their obligations under the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly and the Human Rights Council to properly investigate cases of enforced disappearances and to cooperate with the Working Group.

During the reporting period, the Working Group continued to observe a pattern of “short-term” enforced disappearances being used in a number of countries. The Working Group expresses its deep concern at the phenomenon. It stresses that no enforced disappearance is acceptable, no matter how short its duration, and that accurate information on the detention of any person deprived of his or her liberty and the place of detention should be made available promptly to family members.

The Working Group is concerned about the situation in a number of countries, as reflected in the present report. It reiterates article 7 of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, which provides that no circumstances whatsoever, whether a threat of war, a state of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked to justify enforced disappearances.

The Working Group continues to be concerned about the increase in instances of abductions carried out by non-State actors, which may be tantamount of acts of enforced disappearance. The Working Group held an expert meeting in February 2016 to discuss that issue and will continue to study whether those situations fall under its mandate and, if so, what actions should be taken. The Working Group calls on all stakeholders to take appropriate measures and to provide information to, and share their views on this matter with, the Working Group.

The Working Group continues to note a pattern of threats, intimidation and reprisals against victims of enforced disappearance, including family members, witnesses and human rights defenders working on such cases. It calls upon States to take specific measures to prevent such acts, protect those working on cases of enforced disappearances and punish the perpetrators, in accordance with article 13 (1) and (3) of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. In that respect, the Working Group welcomes the appointment by the Secretary-General, in October 2016, of the new Head of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in New York at the level of Assistant Secretary-General. This senior official will lead efforts within the United Nations system to address intimidation and reprisals against those cooperating with the Organization on human rights.

Country visits are an integral part of the mandate of the Working Group. Visits allow the Working Group to highlight country practices in addressing enforced disappearance, to assist States in reducing obstacles to implement the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and to ensure direct contact with the family members of victims. The Working Group thanks the Governments of the Gambia, the Sudan and Tajikistan for the invitations extended during the reporting period. It also recognizes the support provided by the Government of Albania during the visit carried out in December 2016. During the reporting period, the Working Group also requested to visit the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Turkmenistan. In addition to having made new requests, the Working Group reiterated its past requests to visit the following countries, without having yet received a positive response: Bangladesh, Bahrain, Belarus, Burundi, China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Lebanon, Nepal, Nicaragua, Philippines, Russian Federation, Rwanda, South Africa, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan and Zimbabwe. There are other countries that have invited the Working Group to visit and/or confirmed invitations, but for which specific dates have not been agreed, such as Algeria and Iran (Islamic Republic of). Visits to Libya and South Sudan, which have been accepted by the respective countries, have not taken place so far, mainly for security reasons. The Working Group therefore calls upon all States with pending requests for visits to respond favourably to them in the light of Human Rights Council resolution 21/4 and, for those that have agreed to visits, to respond as soon as possible with specific dates.

The Working Group reiterates its previous call to be given a role in the follow-up to the findings of commissions of inquiry and other fact-finding or investigative bodies created by the Human Rights Council insofar as they relate to enforced disappearances (see A/HRC/33/Add.51, para. 119).

The Working Group continues the practice to hold one session per year outside Geneva, in part so as to facilitate interaction with the relatives of disappeared persons and raise awareness of the Working Group’s mandate and activities at the local and regional levels. It appreciates the invitation received from the Government of the Republic of Korea to host a session during the reporting period as well as that from the Government of Belgium to host a session in Brussels in 2018. The Working Group invites other countries to follow these good examples.

The Working Group once again calls upon States that have not signed and/or ratified the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance to do so as soon as possible and to accept the competence of the Committee on Enforced Disappearances to receive individual cases under article 31 and inter-State complaints under article 32 of the Convention. Annex I Country visit requests and invitations extended Invitations extended to the WGEID Country Date Albania 5 to 12 December 2016 Algeria¹ tbd Ecuador tbd Gambia (The) 12 to 19 June 2017 Iran (Islamic Republic of)² tbd Kyrgyzstan tbd Libya tbd, postponed South Sudan Last quarter of 2016 (did not take place) Sudan 20 to 29 November 2017 Tajikistan tbd Visits requested by the WGEID Country Request sent Last reminder sent Bahrain 27 October 2014 18 November 2016 Bangladesh 12 March 2013 18 November 2016 Belarus 30 June 2011 18 November 2016 Burundi 27 May 2009 18 November 2016 China 19 February 2013 18 November 2016 Democratic People’s Republic of Korea 22 May 2015 18 November 2016 Democratic Republic of Congo 17 May 2017 - Egypt 30 June 2011 18 November 2016 India 16 August 2010 18 November 2016 Indonesia 12 December 2006 18 November 2016 Kenya 19 February 2013 18 November 2016 Lebanon 27 November 2015 18 November 2016 1 Please refer to paras. 28 and 64 of the current document. 2 Please refer to paras. 28 and 87 of the current document. Country Request sent Last reminder sent Nepal 12 May 2006 18 November 2016 Nicaragua 23 May 2006 18 November 2016 Philippines 3 April 2008 18 November 2016 Russian Federation 2 November 2006 18 November 2016 Rwanda 27 October 2014 18 November 2016 South Africa 28 October 2014 18 November 2016 South Sudan 29 August 2011 22 April 2016 Syrian Arab Republic 19 September 2011 18 November 2016 Thailand 30 June 2011 18 November 2016 Turkmenistan 18 November 2016 - The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 27 October 2014 27 November 2015 Ukraine 22 April 2016 18 November 2016 United Arab Emirates 13 September 2013 18 November 2016 Uzbekistan 30 June 2011 18 November 2016 Zimbabwe 20 July 2009 18 November 2016 Annex II Statistical summary: cases of enforced or involuntary disappearance reported to the Working Group between 1980 and 2017, and general allegations transmitted Outstanding cases Total Cases clarified by: Status of person at date of clarification Discontinued cases Closed cases General Allegation States/entities Cases Female Cases Female Government Sources At liberty In detention Dead GA sent Response Afghanistan Albania Algeria 3 179 3 208 Yes (2013) Yes Angola Argentina¹ 3 241 3 444 Bahrain Yes (2014) Yes Bangladesh Yes (2011, 2016, 2017) No Belarus Bhutan² Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Bosnia and Herzegovina Yes (2009, 2011, 2014) Yes 1 The Working Group decided at its 110th session to transfer three cases from Argentina to Uruguay. 2 The Working Group decided at its 111th session to transfer five cases from Bhutan to India. Outstanding cases Total Cases clarified by: Status of person at date of clarification Discontinued cases Closed cases General Allegation States/entities Cases Female Cases Female Government Sources At liberty In detention Dead GA sent Response Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Yes (2016) No Central African Republic Yes (2013) No Chad Chile China Yes (2010, 2011) Yes Colombia 1 260 Yes (2012, 2013, 2015, 2016) Yes Congo Cuba Czech Republic Yes (2009) Yes Democratic People’s Republic of Korea Yes (2012) No Democratic Republic of the Congo Yes (2015) Yes Denmark Yes (2009) No Outstanding cases Total Cases clarified by: Status of person at date of clarification Discontinued cases Closed cases General Allegation States/entities Cases Female Cases Female Government Sources At liberty In detention Dead GA sent Response Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt Yes (2011, 2016) Yes El Salvador 2 282 2 673 Yes (2015) No Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Yes (2012, 2017) No Ethiopia France Gambia Georgia Greece Guatemala 2 897 3 154 Yes (2011, 2013) Yes Guinea Guyana Haiti Honduras Outstanding cases Total Cases clarified by: Status of person at date of clarification Discontinued cases Closed cases General Allegation States/entities Cases Female Cases Female Government Sources At liberty In detention Dead GA sent Response India3 Yes (2009, 2011, 2013) No Indonesia Yes (2011, 2013, 2017) No Iran (Islamic Republic of) Yes (2017) No Iraq 16 416 2 300 16 563 2 317 Ireland Yes (2009) No Israel Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Yes (2011, 2014, 2016, 2017) No Kuwait Lao PDR Lebanon Libya Yes (2014) No Lithuania Yes (2012) Yes 3 The Working Group decided at its 111th session to transfer five cases from Bhutan to India. Outstanding cases Total Cases clarified by: Status of person at date of clarification Discontinued cases Closed cases General Allegation States/entities Cases Female Cases Female Government Sources At liberty In detention Dead GA sent Response Malaysia Maldives Mauritania Mexico Yes (2013, 2014, 2017/2) No Montenegro Morocco Yes (2013) Yes Mozambique Myanmar Yes (2017) No Namibia Nepal Yes (2014) No Nicaragua Nigeria Oman Pakistan Yes (2015) Yes Paraguay Yes (2014) Yes Peru 2 365 3 006 Philippines Yes (2009, 2012) No Romania Republic of Korea Russian Federation Yes (2016) Yes Outstanding cases Total Cases clarified by: Status of person at date of clarification Discontinued cases Closed cases General Allegation States/entities Cases Female Cases Female Government Sources At liberty In detention Dead GA sent Response Rwanda Saudi Arabia Serbia Seychelles Somalia South Africa South Sudan Spain Yes (2014) Yes Sri Lanka 5 859 12 450 6 551 6 446 Yes (2011, 2014) Yes Sudan Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Yes (2011/2) Yes Tajikistan Thailand Yes No The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Yes (2009) No Timor-Leste Togo Tunisia Turkey⁴ Turkmenistan 4 The Working Group determined during its 111th session that one case was a duplicate and subsequently expunged it from the records. Outstanding cases Total Cases clarified by: Status of person at date of clarification Discontinued cases Closed cases General Allegation States/entities Cases Female Cases Female Government Sources At liberty In detention Dead GA sent Response Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Republic of Tanzania United States of America Uruguay⁵ Yes (2013, 2015) Yes Uzbekistan Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) Viet Nam Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Yes (2009) No State of Palestine 5 The Working Group decided at its 110th session to transfer three cases from Argentina to Uruguay. Annex III Graphs showing the number of cases of enforced disappearances per year and per country according to the cases transmitted by the Working Group during the period 1980-17 May 2017 (only for countries with more than 100 cases transmitted)

1. The Working Group decided at its 110th session to transfer three cases from Argentina to Uruguay. ↩
2. The Working Group decided at its 111th session to transfer five cases from Bhutan to India. ↩
1. The Working Group decided at its 110th session to transfer three cases from Argentina to Uruguay. ↩
2. The Working Group decided at its 111th session to transfer five cases from Bhutan to India. ↩
4. The Working Group determined during its 111th session that one case was a duplicate and subsequently expunged it from the records. ↩
5. The Working Group decided at its 110th session to transfer three cases from Argentina to Uruguay. ↩