Examples of impacts on women: • The classification of specific legal matters as “non-urgent” and the closure of courts under emergency measures has a discriminatory impact on women seeking justice. Typically, women apply to the legal system considerably more often than men for issues concerning social welfare, family and children – 40 per cent and 75 per cent “more women report legal issues relating to domestic violence and child support, respectively”. Many of these functions have been suspended or disrupted – not only the judicial processes but also support services (such as legal aid and counselling) that women rely on to connect them to the justice system. In this way, emergency measures compromise women’s access to justice. • Justice systems across the OSCE region have taken differing approaches to the classification of specific cases as “urgent” and, while there was not comprehensive information available at the time of writing, it appears that the majority of OSCE participating States are addressing cases that concern gender-based violence, divorce, child custody, division of property and alimony remotely. Systems for remote justice vary greatly by jurisdiction, even within a single country. For example, in the United States, the use of remote filing and hearings for civil protective orders in domestic violence cases is not uniform; some states have e-filing systems, but others require an applicant to file in person. Hearings have been conducted by telephone or through video teleconferencing in some states, while, in others, hearings have been suspended during the COVID-19 outbreak. General concerns about whether remote justice fulfils the due diligence obligation and standards of fairness in cases of domestic violence (which often overlap with child custody hearings) include the fact that certain groups of women are excluded from digital services (e.g., lower income women who do not have mobile phones and computers; women in rural areas where technologies are not supported, women who are unfamiliar with the required technology, or women who have disabilities); issues with confidentiality, privacy and safety (e.g., issues with abusive partners recording digital hearings or being able to intimidate survivors of domestic violence during videoconferences); and difficulties for judges when there is lack of face-to-face contact (e.g., difficulties viewing evidence of injuries, not being able to judge the reactions of witnesses and difficulties with interpreters). The right to seek asylum is not contained in any single international treaty. However, the human rights of refugees include both the right to seek asylum and protection from non-refoulement. The right to seek asylum refers to the fundamental right to seek protection in another country from persecution that has occurred in one’s country of origin, according to fair and efficient procedures, and not to be returned or expelled pending a final determination of one’s status, while ensuring the protection of asylum-seekers’ other human rights. The OSCE participating States have reiterated the importance of protecting the human rights of refugees and other displaced persons, as well as a commitment to respect the right to asylum. Right to seek asylum In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Director of ODIHR called on participating States to guarantee respect for the right to asylum, in order to better integrate refugees into host countries. 43