PART III.  INSTRUMENTS OF FORCE “Personal” weapons In some countries law enforcement officials procure their own firearms. In principle, no personal weapons or devices should be permitted for policing duties, unless they are duly authorized and registered the same way as other weapons and made traceable. CHAPTER KEY MESSAGES • Any instrument of force should, prior to deployment, be appropriately tested and properly authorized; law enforcement authorities should develop regulations and guidelines on their use. • A law enforcement official employing any use of force should be able to justify the initial use of force and each subsequent application of force, as each use of force must conform to the standards of necessity and proportionality. • For each use of an instrument of force, an assessment should be made by the law enforcement official to decide whether force is required to achieve the objective, what maximum level of force is permissible, and what minimum level of force may be sufficient. After each instance of force being used, the situation should be re-assessed. • All law enforcement personnel who either use any instrument of force or supervise others who use any instrument of force should receive adequate training on the use of any and all instruments of force available to them or their subordinates. Training should be scenariobased, as close to reality as possible, emphasize risks involved, recur every six months, and enable officers to articulate the reason for the use of force in a particular instance. • Any use of force by a law enforcement official should be recorded and reported. Shows of force, such as the unholstering and pointing of a firearm, should also be recorded and reported. Law enforcement officials are personally responsible for the use of an instrument of force and should be personally identifiable. • Each instrument of force carries specific risks that should be fully understood by the law enforcement official, who should take into account any mitigating measures that may reduce such risks. • In accordance with the right to life, use of firearms should be intended to stop the threat, rather than to kill, i.e., the “shoot-to-live” approach. As soon as the threat has been stopped, there is no longer a need to use (potentially) lethal force. Law enforcement officials should be able to justify each individual shot fired. • With respect to the use of firearms, it should be possible to trace who fired a gun; any use of a firearm in the performance of duty should be reported, even if no shots were fired; and whenever the use of force resulted in death or serious injury, this should be investigated by an independent body. • Control, storage, registration and issuance of all instruments of force should be strictly regulated with records kept that can trace instruments of force, and components of instruments such as bullets, to the assigned officer. • All allegations of excessive or inappropriate use of these weapons should be promptly, impartially and thoroughly investigated, and victims should obtain redress and fair and adequate compensation. 103