Assessing Damage, Urging Action of the examples in this chapter of institutional secrecy and impunity pre-date 9/11; others have roots in the response to 9/11 and the increased importance placed on intelligence and intelligence cooperation. These trends have shown the lacunae in the domestic and international regulation of intelligence efforts. The Panel believes that this has to change. Ending impunity and ensuring accountability are crucial to establishing confidence in the intelligence services. The Panel believes that genuinely accountable intelligence agencies are essential if UN Member States are to comply with their duties under international law (and relevant Security Council Resolutions) to fight terrorism and uphold human rights. The Panel believes that there is an urgent need to take stock of existing mechanisms of democratic control of the intelligence services and to ensure that all aspects, including international cooperation, are governed by law and regulations in full compliance with international human rights standards. The Panel recommends in particular that at the domestic level: • States should recognise the clear distinction between the roles of intelligence and law enforcement; intelligence agencies should not perform the function of law enforcement personnel and, in particular, should have no powers to detain or arrest people. To the extent that intelligence agencies are given any coercive powers, intelligence agents must comply with the same standards as exist under ordinary law and in conformity with human rights standards, most particularly by ensuring detainees prompt access to a lawyer and the courts. • States should ensure that data gathering and storage is handled with due respect for their human rights obligations, and that particular care is taken to ensure the non-discriminatory use of any such material (the text refers to good practice guidance available on the issue of profiling). Judicial authorisation and oversight should be integral to intrusive surveillance powers, with legal clarity as to when such powers can be used and on what criteria. • States should recognise that they are responsible under international law for the acts of their intelligence agents. To comply with this responsibility, States must make intelligence agencies (including military intelligence units) subject to a combination of effective internal and external controls and oversight mechanisms, including effective parliamentary oversight. Judicial control of intrusive measures, and access to lawyers, and eventually courts, for appropriate remedies, is of great importance. Where States have already instituted controls, they should undertake a review to ascertain that the controls are effective in practice, with adequate powers and resources to fulfil their mandate. 89