A/72/178 torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and those involved in overseeing and regulating the use of force more generally. C. Scope 3. While the present report is focused on the extra-custodial use of force by State agents, its conclusions generally will also be relevant, mutatis mutandis, for non-physical forms of coercion and for ill-treatment committed by non-State actors. Owing to constraints of time and space, the Special Rapporteur intends to more systematically consider those issues in subsequent thematic reports. Moreover, in the present report the extra-custodial use of force under the law enforcement paradigm both in peacetime and in armed conflict is covered, but the use of force as a means of warfare under the hostilities paradigm is not examined. The terms “State agent” and “law enforcement official” will be used interchangeably to denote any person exercising, de jure or de facto, public authority on behalf of the State, whether of military or civilian status and whether appointed, elected, employed or contracted, including private security personnel. 2 Finally, the implications of the extra-custodial use of force are examined in the present report under human rights law only, and not under potentially applicable international humanitarian law. D. Process 4. Building on the work undertaken by his predecessors and other mandate holders and mechanisms, the Special Rapporteur conducted extensive research and broad stakeholder consultations with academic experts and representatives of governments, international organizations and civil society organizations, including through a multi-stakeholder expert meeting held in Geneva on 1 and 2 May 2017 and a general call for submissions in response to a thematic questionnaire posted on the website of the Office of the United Nations High Commissio ner for Human Rights from 29 May to 30 June 2017. 3 The present report reflects the resulting conclusions and recommendations of the Special Rapporteur. II. Legal principles governing the use of force 5. Apart from prohibiting the arbitrary deprivation of life and providing a few principles on the lawful use of lethal force, human rights treaties do not expressly regulate the extra-custodial use of force. 4 Instead, the contemporary legal principles governing the use of force by law enforcement officia ls (“use of force principles”) have been derived primarily from State practice and the application and interpretation of these very general treaty provisions in case law. The principles have been restated in two soft law instruments, namely, the Basic Prin ciples on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials and the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, and today can be regarded as general principles of __________________ 2 3 4 17-12326 Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, art. 1, and Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, endnote, albeit without mention of private security providers (on that matter, see A/HRC/32/39). See www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Torture/SRTorture/Pages/ExtraCustodi alUseForce.aspx. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 6; American Convention on Human Rights, art. 4; African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, art. 4; and European Convention on Human Rights, art. 2. 5/24