forcement and some security-company activities. The HRC has made it clear that under the ICCPR the state’s obligations require that criminal law should apply to these agencies if they violate certain human rights, notably the prohibition on torture and ill-treatment. The third category involves those who commit crimes, including murder, that can give rise to state responsibility if the state has failed to take all appropriate measures to deter, prevent and punish the perpetrators, as well as to address any attitudes or conditions in society that encourage or facilitate such crimes. Examples falling into this category include so-called honour killings and killings directed at groups such as homosexuals or members of minority groups. An isolated killing may not give rise to any government responsibility,236 but once a pattern becomes clear, government inaction can be seen as conferring a degree of impunity upon the killers and failing to satisfy its positive obligations, including its obligation to investigate. The fourth and final group are those involved in armed opposition against the government. As has already been discussed, as a matter of strict interpretation of human rights law they cannot be classified as human rights violators, regardless of the atrocities that they may carry out. The state must, however, hold these groups criminally accountable for their activities. 236 Op. cit., note 28, ECtHR, Osman v. UK. 94 Countering Terrorism, Protecting Human Rights