A/57/173 6 Brogan and others versus the United Kingdom, European Court of Human Rights, Judgement (Merits), 29 November 1988, paras. 61 and 62. 7 Ibid., para. 62. 8 Brannigan and McBride versus the United Kingdom, European Court of Human Rights, Judgements (Merits), 26 May 1993, paras. 63 and 64. 9 Aksoy versus Turkey, European Court of Human Rights, Judgement (Merits and just satisfaction), 18 December 1996, para. 84. 10 Ibid., para. 83. 11 Habeas Corpus in Emergency Situations, Inter-American Court on Human Rights, Advisory opinion, OC-8/87, 30 January 1987, para. 35. 12 E/CN.4/Sub.2/1997/19, para. 111. 13 A/56/156, para. 39. 14 See E/CN.4/2002/137, para. 7. 15 A/56/156, para. 39 (f). 16 Commission on Human Rights resolution 1999/32, para. 5. 17 A/56/156, para. 39 (h). 18 See HRI/GEN/1/Rev.5, General Comment No. 8 (Right to liberty and security of persons), 30 June 1982, para. 4. 19 A/56/156, para. 39 (f). 20 Ibid. 21 HRI/GEN/1/Rev.5, General Comment No. 8, para. 3. 22 See A/56/156, para. 39 (d). 23 See A/56/156, para. 39 (f). 24 See A/56/156, para. 39 (j). 25 CAT/C/XXVII/Concl.5. 26 See A/56/156, para. 39 (j). 27 Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status under the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees (HCR/IP/4/Eng/Rev.1), para. 176. 28 Ibid., para. 180. 29 Guy S. Goodwin-Gill, The Refugee in International Law, 2nd edition (Oxford, England, Oxford University Press, 1996), p. 150. 30 Chahal versus the United Kingdom, European Court of Human Rights, Judgement (Merits and just satisfaction), 15 November 1996, para. 80. 31 See A/56/156, paras 34-38. 32 The coalition of international non-governmental organizations consists of the following: Association for the Prevention of Torture, World Organization against Torture, Fédération internationale de l’action des Chrétiens pour l’abolition de la torture, Fédération international des ligues des droits de l’homme, Human Rights Watch, International Commission of Jurists, International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims, International League for Human Rights, International Service for Human Rights, Amnesty International and Redress. 33 A/56/156, para. 36. 34 As of May 2002, the following countries had extended standing invitations to the thematic special procedures of the Commission on Human Rights: Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Georgia, Greece, Guatemala, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, Netherlands, Norway, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. 35 For more information, see Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment. Available from http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org 36 EPOCH-Worldwide is an informal alliance of nongovernmental organizations which aim is to end all forms of corporal punishment of children. 37 See E/CN.4/1993/26, para. 593, and E/CN.4/1997/7, paras 4-11. 38 Commission on Human Rights resolution 1997/38, para. 9. 39 HRI/GEN/1/Rev.5, General Comment No. 20, 10 March 1992, para. 5. 40 Article 19, paragraph 1, of the Convention on the Rights of the Child states the following: “States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse, while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of the child”. 41 See CRC/C/34, annex IV, section II (B). 42 A/57/41, paras. 8 and 14 (a). See also Report and General Recommendations: Committee on the Rights of the Child, Day of General Discussion Geneva, 22 September 2000. Available from www.unhchr.ch/html/menu2/6/crcdod.htm 43 CRC/C/58, para. 88. 15