A/57/173 1. The present report is the fourth report submitted to the General Assembly by the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on the question of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, pursuant to General Assembly resolution 56/143 (paragraph 32) and Commission resolution 2002/38 (paragraph 31). It is the first report to be submitted by the present mandate-holder, Theo van Boven. Like his predecessor’s reports, this report includes issues of special concern to the Special Rapporteur, in particular overall trends and recent developments. I. The prohibition of torture and other forms of ill-treatment in the context of anti-terrorism measures 2. Ensuring security for all human beings has become one of the major challenges faced by the international community. Legislative and other measures to combat terrorism and protect national security have reportedly been flourishing in a number of countries in response to legitimate needs to prevent terrorist acts and punish those responsible for having financed, planned, supported or committed such acts. Fears have nevertheless been expressed that some of these measures may not fully respect basic human rights and fundamental freedoms. Calls for a fair balance between on the one hand the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms by all and on the other hand legitimate concerns over national and international security have thus been heard on several occasions.1 In his remarks at the fifty-seventh session of the Commission on Human Rights, the SecretaryGeneral stated that security could not be achieved by sacrificing human rights, and that to try and do so would hand the terrorists a victory beyond their dreams. On the contrary, greater respect for human rights, along with democracy and social justice, would in the long term prove the only effective prophylactic against terror. He remarked that the end does not justify the means, and that instead, the means tarnish, and may pervert, the end. Terrorism is one of the threats against which States must protect their citizens. They have not only the right, but also the duty, to do so. However, States must also take the greatest care to ensure that counter-terrorism does not, any more than sovereignty, become an all-embracing concept that is use to cloak, or justify, violations of human rights. 4 3. The Special Rapporteur notes that there is no internationally agreed definition of terrorism. The concept of terrorism, increasingly used in new legislation, is often construed as being too vague or as encompassing peaceful political opposition activities. The Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism (resolution 49/60 of 9 December 1994, annex, para. 3) declares that “criminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes are in any circumstance unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be invoked to justify them”. It further states that “acts, methods and practices of terrorism constitute a grave violation of the purposes and principles of the United Nations, which may pose a threat to international peace and security … and aim at the destruction of human rights, fundamental freedoms and the democratic bases of society” (para. 2). 4. Accordingly, in its resolution 1373 (2001) adopted under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter (“Action with respect to threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, and acts of aggression”), the Security Council underscored the responsibility of all States to eradicate terrorism, and established the Counter-Terrorism Committee with a view to monitoring the implementation of this resolution, in particular with the assistance of appropriate expertise. As stated by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in her report to the last session of the Commission on Human Rights, several of the areas that the Committee intends to deal with, inter alia, drafting counter-terrorism legislation, financial law, customs law, immigration law, extradition law, police and law enforcement work, and illegal arms trafficking, have a strong human rights dimension. Owing to the serious human rights concerns that could arise from the misapplication of resolution 1373 (2001), it would be desirable that a human rights expert assist the Committee.2 The Special Rapporteur fully supports the suggestion made by the High Commissioner, especially, from the perspective of his mandate, with respect to the issues of extradition law and police and law enforcement work. 5. According to information received by the Special Rapporteur, the provisions of some new anti-terrorist legislation at the national level may not provide sufficient legal safeguards as recognized by