122 Report of the Eminent Jurists Panel on terrorism, counter-terrorism and human rights At both the international and domestic levels, the international legal principles are the same as laid out above: • The criteria leading to listing should be clear, publicly available and non-discriminatory; • the listings must be strictly time-limited and subject to limited renewal; • there must be sufficient notification to the affected parties; • opportunities must be accorded to rectify errors; • there must be an effective remedy to allow decisions to be contested; and • there must be independent review mechanisms. e. General Having examined different preventive measures, the Panel believes it is impossible to over-state the importance of independent judicial oversight. This chapter gives clear examples where the judiciary has intervened to uphold the rule of law and to prevent human rights violations, and situations where the judiciary has been unable to play this vital role. There may be disagreements about appropriate preventive measures, and necessary safeguards, but it is vital to the rule of law that such debates continue, and that the judiciary is given its full and proper place in the adjudicative process. New developments in intelligence-gathering and sharing are explored in Chapter Four. It should, however, be noted that as a rule, the more intrusive the interference is with a person’s rights, and the more irreparable the potential harm caused, the higher the evidential requirement must be. Secrecy, and the lack of due process that often flows from it, can create both the perception, and indeed the reality, of unfairness. This in turn can undermine the perceived legitimacy of the State’s counter-terrorism response. Secrecy has its limits: if secret intelligence cannot be transformed into evidence over time, or if the State fails to obtain new evidence, the preventive measure should cease.