Omega Research Foundation caused by rubber pellets and their inherently indiscriminate nature, Omega believes that they should not be referred to as ‘non-lethal’ and their use should not be permitted in places of detention. Only direct fire single impact munitions with sufficient accuracy to avoid impacting vulnerable body areas should be authorised. Skip-firing: Principle 7.4.5 permits the use of firearms when the life or integrity of someone is placed in ‘certain danger’. Live ammunition is not included in the list of equipment expressly permitted, but ‘riot control ammunition’ can be employed and is to be fired at the ground rather than directly at the person. In spite of instructing prison personnel to employ skip-firing, Principle 7.4.6 warns of the danger of this practice, also known as indirect firing, stating that the deviation in the trajectory of the ammunition once it impacts upon a surface increases the risk for all those involved in the disturbance, noting that ‘riot control ammunition’ can be lethal depending on where a person is struck. The inherent risks of skipfiring makes the rounds’ trajectory unpredictable, increasing the risk that vulnerable areas of the body could be hit.17 Omega believes that skip-firing should be prohibited. Agencies should devote more time to training to ensure officers are able to accurately hit the lower regions of the body with appropriate less lethal munitions. Open-ended list of weapons: Principal 3.2.3.2 provides that weapons not included in the list of weapons which can be used in places of detention can be authorised by judicial order or under the express authorization of the Director General of Security in extremely serious situations. Omega believes that this provision is too broad and recommends that use of force guidelines contain an exclusive list of specified and tested law enforcement equipment which can be used, including human rights based guidelines for their appropriate use. 2) Peru: Law enforcement personnel exempt from criminal responsibility In January 2014, Law 30151, which modified the Peruvian Penal Code, came into force. Article 20 of the Penal Code now states that ‘members of the Armed Forces and the Peruvian National Police who cause injury or death in the performance of their duties and through the use of their weapons or other means of defence’ will be exempt from criminal responsibility. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights,18 the Regional Office of the OHCHR19 and the Peruvian Ombudsperson’s Office20 have all publicly expressed their concern regarding the human rights implications of this reform. The exemption from criminal responsibility for any injury or death caused by security personnel, which has been referred to as a ‘license to kill’ in the media,21 appears to directly 17 Home Office Scientific Development Branch, Less Lethal Technologies Review of Commercially Available and Near-Market Products for the Association of Chief Police Officers, Publication No. 49/08, 2008, p10. 18 Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, ‘IACHR Troubled by entry into Force of Law 30151 In Peru,’ 23 January 2014, <http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/media_center/PReleases/2014/004.asp> [accessed 31 May 2016]. 19 Regional Office of the UN High Commissioner of Human Rights, ‘ONU: Alto Comisionado de DDHH manifiesta preocupación sobre ley que regula uso de armas por parte de fuerzas del orden en Perú,’ 16 January 2014, <http://derechoshumanos.pe/2014/01/onu-alto-comisionado-de-ddhh-manifiesta-preocupacion-sobre-leyque-regula-uso-de-armas-por-parte-de-fuerzas-del-orden-en-peru/> [accessed 31 May 2016]. 20 Peruvian Ombudsperson’s Office, ‘PRONUNCIAMIENTO DE LA DEFENSORÍA DEL PUEBLO EN RELACIÓN CON LA LEY N° 30151,’ 14 January 2014, <http://derechoshumanos.pe/2014/01/defensoria-del-pueblo-senala-queley-30151-debilita-la-proteccion-del-derecho-a-la-vida-y-a-la-integridad-personal-de-la-ciudadania/> [accessed 31 May 2016]. 21 Jacqueline Fowks, ‘Primeros absueltos en Perú por la ley que da 'licencia para matar' a la policía,’ El País, 21 February 2014, 10