III. DIPLOMATIC ASSURANCES AND REFUGEE STATUS DETERMINATION A. General considerations 38. The right to seek and enjoy asylum, as enshrined in Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and inherent in the proper functioning of the 1951 Convention/1967 Protocol, encompasses the obligation of States to examine applications for international refugee protection in fair and efficient procedures.60 While States may put into place different kinds of procedures for the examination of asylum claim, certain core elements are necessary for decision-making in keeping with international protection standards. 61 From an international protection perspective, it is necessary to ensure that the use of diplomatic assurances in the context of asylum procedures does not result in restrictions of essential procedural safeguards and/or jeopardize the substantive examination of asylum claims. B. Diplomatic assurances with regard to asylum-seekers 39. Throughout the asylum procedure, the confidentiality of all aspects of an asylum claim should be respected. 62 As a general rule, no information regarding an asylum application, or the fact that such an application has been made, should be shared with the country of origin or, in the case of stateless asylum-seekers, the country of former habitual residence, as this may breach the applicant’s right to privacy 63 or even expose the applicant or persons associated with him or her to a risk of persecution. Thus, the host State should not seek diplomatic assurances with regard to an asylum-seeker from 60 See UNHCR, Asylum Processes (Fair and Efficient Asylum Procedures), EC/GC/01/12, 31 May 2001, at paragraphs 4–5; see also Executive Committee Conclusions No. 8 (XXVIII) – 1977 on Determination of Refugee Status; No. 15 (XXX) – 1979 on Refugees Without an Asylum Country; No. 30 (XXXIV) – 1983 on the Problem of Manifestly Unfounded or Abusive Applications for Refugee Status or Asylum; No. 58 (XL) – 1989 on Refugees and AsylumSeekers Who Move in an Irregular Manner from a Country in Which They Had Already Found Protection. The importance of access to fair and efficient procedures has also been reaffirmed by the Executive Committee in its Conclusions No. 29 (XXXIV) – 1983; No.55 (XL) – 1989; No. 65 (XLII) – 1991; No. 68 (XLIII) – 1992; No. 71 (XLIV) – 1993; No. 74 (XLV) – 1994; No. 81 (XLVIII) – 1997; No. 82 (XLVIII) – 1997; No. 85 (XLIX) – 1998; No. 92 (LIII) – 2002. See also Goal 1, Objective 2, point 2 of the Programme of Action for the implementation of the Agenda for Protection, adopted during the Ministerial Meeting of States Parties to the 1951 Convention and/or 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees, convened in Geneva on 12 and 13 December 2001, and endorsed by the Executive Committee in its Conclusion No. 92 (LIII) – 2002, at paragraph (a). 61 For an overview of best State practices with regard to these core elements, see UNHCR, Asylum Processes (Fair and Efficient Asylum Procedures), above footnote 60, at paragraph 50. 62 See UNHCR, Asylum Processes (Fair and Efficient Asylum Procedures), above footnote 60, at paragraph 50 (m). 63 International human rights law guarantees everyone the right to privacy and protects individuals from arbitrary or unlawful interference (see, for example, Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; Article 17 (1) ICCPR; Article 8 ECHR; Article 11 ACHR). Effective measures need to be taken to ensure that information concerning a person’s private life does not reach the hands of third parties that might use such information for purposes incompatible with human rights law. See Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 16 on Article 17 of the ICCPR (32nd session, 1988), at paragraph 10, HRI/GEN/1/Rev.1 at p. 23. 16