A/HRC/37/50 treatment.57 The fault of refoulement lies in the deporting State taking action which it "knew or should have known"58 would expose the person in question to a "foreseeable, personal, present and real" risk of torture or ill-treatment in a territory and by perpetrators beyond its control, regardless of whether they are officials of another State or non-State actors.59 39. The non-refoulement protection specifically against the risk of torture and illtreatment is absolute and non-derogable and applies in all situations, including war and states of emergency, to all human beings without discrimination of any kind and, in particular, regardless of their entitlement to refugee status.60 While refugee law limits non-refoulement protection to persons entitled to refugee status and allows for exceptions based on considerations of national or public security,61 no limitation or exception whatsoever is permissible where deportation would expose the person in question to a real risk of torture or ill-treatment. As an intrinsic component of the peremptory prohibition of torture, the prohibition of refoulement trumps not only national immigration laws, but also contradicting international obligations, such as under extradition treaties.62 40. In order to give effect to the prohibition on refoulement, States must inform concerned migrants of an intended deportation in a timely manner and enable them to appear in person before a competent, impartial and independent judicial or administrative body in order to challenge the removal decision and to seek "international protection",63 prior to the envisaged deportation, and in an individualized, prompt and transparent proceeding affording the required interpreter services and all other essential procedural safeguards including the suspensive effect of an appeal.64 Collective deportations without such individual examination are inherently irreconcilable with the prohibition of refoulement.65 Likewise incompatible with procedural requirements of the prohibition of refoulement are so-called "fast-track" screenings carried out by non-specialist border officials at the point of interception on land or at sea and without the presence of legal counsel or the possibility of an effective appeal. 41. In determining whether there is a real risk of torture or ill-treatment in an individual case, "the competent authorities shall 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".66 Thus, the State proposing to expel an individual must engage with any evidence available to it, but must also make its own assessment, taking into account all relevant considerations including both a wider range of personal factors and the general human rights situation in the destination State or territory. 67 For the purposes of nonrefoulement, any torture or ill-treatment which the concerned persons or their families were exposed to in the past or would be exposed to upon deportation, "constitutes an indication that the person is in danger of being subjected to torture".68 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 12 Art.3(1) UNCAT; CAT, GC_No.4_(2017)_Art.3, §§15-17, 26, 28-29; CCPR, GC_No.20(10.03.1992), §9; CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.13(26.05.2004), §12; CRC/GC/2005/6 (01.09.2005), §27. CAT/C/34/D/233/2003, §13.4; ECtHR, Hirsi_Jamaa_et_al._v._Italy(No.27765/09), Jgmt 23.02.2012, §131. CAT, GC_No.4_(2017)_Art.3, §§11, 30; CAT/C/44/D/322/2007(03.06.2010); CAT/C/22/D/120/1998(25.05.1999), §6.5; ECtHR, N._v._Finland(No.38885/02)_2005, §164; ECtHR, J.K._and_Others_v._Sweden(No.59166/12)_2016, §80. CAT, GC_No.4_(2017)_Art.3, §§9-10. Art.33 Refugee Convention(1951). See also: CAT, GC_No.4_(2017)_Art.3, §25. A/RES/62/61,08.01.2008, Art.26, 41(2). "International protection" here refers to protection not only under refugee law, but also under human rights law and, if applicable, international humanitarian law. CAT, GC_No.4_(2017)_Art.3, §13, with references; CCPR/C/88/D/1416/2005(10.11.2006) §11.8; CCPR/C/93/D/1461(31.07.2008), §12.7.; A/70/303, §43. CAT, GC_No.4_(2017)_Art.3, §13; OHCHR, "Expulsions_of_aliens", Discussion Paper(2006), p.15; Art.4 Protocol_4 ECHR. Art.3.2. UNCAT. For a non-exhaustive list of factors, see: CAT, GC_No.4_(2017)_Art.3, §29(a)-(o). CAT, GC_No.4_(2017)_Art.3, §28.