12 A study conducted by the ministry responsible for overseeing law enforcement in the Canadian province of Ontario found that use of acoustic devices “may result in hearing risks for operators and bystanders”, and recommended setting minimum operating distances and limiting use of the alert function.15 According to the United Nations Human Rights Guidance on Less-Lethal Weapons in Law Enforcement, “[t]he indiscriminate use of an acoustic weapon against a crowd, or against targeted individuals at a range where the decibel output is likely to cause permanent hearing damage, would be unlawful.”16 Certain acoustic devices are designed to target only young people. They emit a strong, pulsating sound in a high frequency range that is irritating and often painful to most people under 20, but which is barely audible for people over 25. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) has stated that the use of such devices violates a series of human rights, including the prohibition of discrimination, the prohibition of torture or other ill-treatment, and the right to respect for one’s private life, including the right to respect for physical integrity.17 PACE also stated that, depending on the circumstances, the use of such devices could interfere with the right to freedom of peaceful assembly. The authors of this publication are not aware of any current law enforcement use of devices that specifically target young people in OSCE countries. What monitors should observe and record • In what circumstances were the acoustic devices used? • Were the acoustic devices used free-standing, vehicle-mounted, embedded in a riot control shield or body-worn? • What did the devices look like? Monitors should try to record the shape and size, and take images or video, focusing on any logos, names or other markings that might identify the manufacturer or model. • What did the devices sound like? Was the tone constant or high pitched? Was it used repeatedly? • Did the deployment appear to be targeted (i.e., did it affect people in a limited area)? 15 16 17 Ontario Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services, Review of Police Use of Long-Range Acoustic Devices, op. cit., note 13, pp. 16-17. UN, UN Human Rights Guidance on Less-Lethal Weapons in Law Enforcement, op. cit., note 7, para. 7.8.5. Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), “Prohibiting the Marketing and Use of the ‘Mosquito’ Youth Dispersal Device”, Recommendation 1930 (2010), adopted on 25 June 2010, paras. 9-12, <http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/ XRef/ Xref-XML2HTML-en. asp?fileid=17891&lang=en>.