As a general principle of human rights law, the requirement for legality imports the rule of law (nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege − no crime or penalty without a law). Human rights law and the rule of law are, as concepts, therefore inseparable. The rule of law also requires a clear legal basis for any deviation from human rights standards. Rule of law means that the law applies to everyone and that no one is exempt, or above the law, whoever they maybe, or for whatever reason they have acted. Once this principle is accepted, it acknowledges the supremacy of law and establishes that it is the law, not those in power, which provides the framework for government. The rule of law requires both citizens and governments to be subject to known and accessible laws. In turn, this affirms the principle of equality before the law and fundamental guarantees such as the presumption of innocence. A primary feature of the rule of law is that laws should not be made in respect of particular persons. The rule of law presupposes the absence of wide discretionary authority in those that rule, so that they cannot make their own laws but must govern according to the established laws. Those laws ought not to be too easily changeable. Stable laws are a prerequisite to the certainty and confidence that form an essential part of individual freedom and security. Separation of powers among the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government is at the heart of the rule of law. A failure to maintain the formal differences between these leads to a concept of law as nothing more than authorization for power, rather than the guarantee of liberty, equally to all. Key elements of the rule of law include: • the law must be accessible and so far as possible intelligible, clear and predictable; • questions of legal right and liability should ordinarily be resolved by application of the law and not the exercise of discretion; • the laws of the land should apply equally to all, save to the extent that objective differences justify differentiation; • the law must afford adequate protection of fundamental human rights; • means must be provided for resolving, without prohibitive cost or inordinate delay, bona fide civil disputes that the parties themselves are unable to resolve; • ministers and public officers at all levels must exercise the powers conferred on them reasonably, in good faith, for the purpose for which the powers were conferred and without exceeding the limits of such powers; • adjudicative procedures provided by the state should be fair; and • the state must comply with its obligations in international law. The right to an effective remedy To be meaningful, human rights include the right to an effective remedy in case human rights are violated.133 The right to an effective remedy for human rights violations is contained in Article 2(3) ICCPR and Article 13 ECHR. This obligation is designed to combat impunity and to ensure that rights are practical and effective and not rendered worthless or insignificant because they can be ignored. 133 Article 8 UDHR reads: “Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.” 62 Countering Terrorism, Protecting Human Rights