Tools of Torture and Repression in South America    Use of force rules offer law enforcement officials guidance regarding the appropriate course of action in given situations, thereby providing them with the information needed to avoid participating in human rights violations. Such regulations must include provisions to aid accountability for abuses carried out by law enforcement officials. They are also an important factor which states and companies should consider when deciding whether or not to export law enforcement equipment to a particular end user. Clearly, where adequate use of force guidelines are absent, abuses constituting human rights violations are more likely to occur. GOOD PRACTICE AND PROTECTION GAPS While a detailed analysis of the use of force rules and regulations in place in each South American country is beyond the scope of this report,15 it is worthwhile highlighting specific examples of good practice in both the process to create such instruments and their actual content. On the other hand, it is also important to identify protection gaps where changes may be required if states are to uphold their human rights obligations. Of course, some instruments regulating the use of force contain both good practice and weaknesses. Illustrative country examples 1) Argentina: Principles for the Rational Use of Force in the Province of Buenos Aires Penitentiary Service In 2015, the Buenos Aires Ministry of Justice adopted a set of principles governing the use of force in places of detention. This was the result of an 18-month consultation process which was both inclusive and participative. The fact that multiple stakeholders, including civil society organisations and the police, were actively involved in the dialogue to develop these principles should be considered good practice. While it remains to be seen how effectively they will be implemented, some of the principles are commendable, whereas others need to be modified if they are to meet human rights standards: Principle 2.2 states: ‘Force can only be used when other means have been ineffective and never on a restrained subject. Force can never be used to punish those deprived of their liberty.’ The Principles provide clear guidance on the level of force which is permitted in different scenarios, taking particular account of where the incident occurs (i.e. in an open, semi-open or confined space). Principle 2.7 provides that violation of the protocol can result in administrative and/or criminal sanctions, and Principle 11 sets out clear instructions on registering each use of force incident. If implemented correctly, these measures should contribute to clearer parameters within which prison personnel will be expected to act and improved oversight and accountability. However, Omega has concerns about some of the provisions: Rubber pellet ammunition: Principal 3.2.3.2 provides that only batons and shotguns with blank cartridges or rubber pellets are permitted. However, the Principles also stipulate that only ‘non-lethal’ ammunition may be used inside prisons,16 suggesting that rubber pellet ammunition is considered ‘non-lethal’. Given the numerous severe injuries that have been 15 If such a study were to be carried out, it could also examine how the various criminal justice systems define and sanction the crime of torture. 16 Principios para el uso racional de la fuerza en el Servicio Penitenciario Bonaerense, Principle 7.4.2. 9