PART III.  INSTRUMENTS OF FORCE be assessed individually since effects can vary greatly even among different weapons of the same broad category. Consideration must be given to the risk the particular weapon offers for abuse. Where this is the case, either the device must be adapted to prevent such abuse, or where that is not possible, guidelines must be developed to prevent abuse from happening. Care must be taken to thoroughly scrutinize extra functions the weapons may be equipped with, in order to assess whether these are necessary and what risks they pose. Firearms having an “automatic function” should have the possibility of disabling that function. Equipment to digitally and audio record the use of the instrument of force should be enabled to facilitate any subsequent investigation as well as protect the law enforcement officer from any wrongful accusations.162 The decision on what equipment to procure should be taken in consultation with the end user, including the law enforcement officials. In countries where law enforcement officials are permitted to join a union, representatives of the union can play an important advisory role in this respect. Having finished the evaluation and assessment processes, and based on the outcomes of the performance trials, training programmes can be developed in order to assist the instrument being “rolled out”. Instruments may be procured for a particular highly specialized unit, for example a SWAT team or an Anti-Terrorism Unit, but this should not lead to proliferation of those weapons throughout all law enforcement units, including those with more general duties. It is recommended to have a central list of approved equipment, at the national level or per single law enforcement agency. The responsibility for procurement of instruments of force, choice of ammunition and developing guidelines, may lie with the law enforcement agency or with the relevant Ministry. Either way, for accountability purposes, it has to be clearly stated, and preferably established under law, who can authorize the choice of weaponry and be responsible for its procurement. For example, in Argentina, the National Directorate of Logistics, which falls under the National Security Ministry, coordinates logistics plans of the police and security forces and provides oversight of its implementation. INSTRUMENTS THAT HAVE NO PLACE IN HUMAN RIGHTS-BASED LAW ENFORCEMENT INCLUDE: • Weapons that have been designed to cause unnecessary suffering, such as spiked batons or thumb cuffs • Incendiary ammunition, that is ammunition that causes fire • White phosphorus smoke • Bayonets fixed on the firearm • Artillery as well as weapons delivered by aircraft • Any weapon that is illegal under an international convention, such as landmines The entire procurement process should be placed under effective oversight or democratic control that is independent of commercial, police or political interference, and is made up of a 162  At the same time, it should be kept in mind that such recordings may have serious human rights implications, in particular with respect to the right to privacy. At the same time this feature may also discourage abuse by law enforcement officials. Each time an agency decides to make use of this function, it should carefully balance all considerations as relevant in the specific context. 75