before the law, the right to a fair trial, the right to private and family life, and the right to an effective remedy. Depending on the circumstances, it may also amount to an enforced disappearance.67 In the context of counter-terrorism, some States have made use of diplomatic assurances, memorandums of understanding and other forms of diplomatic agreement to justify the return or irregular transfer of individuals suspected of terrorist activity to countries where they may face a real risk of torture or other serious human rights abuse. This practice raises a number of serious human rights concerns. The High Commissioner for Human Rights has emphasized that, as a practical matter, these arrangements do not work as in reality they do not provide adequate protection against torture and other ill-treatment, nor, as a legal matter, can they nullify the obligation of non-refoulement. In most cases, assurances are concluded between States which are party to binding international and regional treaties which prohibit torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and refoulement to such practices, raising, in any event, the question as to why further bilateral steps are necessary. In addition, even though all persons are entitled to the equal protection of existing treaties, assurances amount to the creation of a two-class system among detainees, by creating special protection for a selected few, while ignoring the plight of many others. Efforts should therefore focus on the full implementation of international human rights obligations through existing structures, notably through the establishment of systems of regular visits, by independent international and national bodies, of places where people are deprived of their liberty. All States have a positive obligation to ensure that their territory is not used to transfer persons to places where they are likely to be subjected to torture. This includes taking all practical steps to determine whether foreign movements through its territory involve such practices where there are grounds to believe that there is a real risk of irreparable harm. At a minimum, it means ensuring that any transfer of persons from one territory to another is undertaken pursuant to a prescription by law and within the framework of international law. In addition, judicial oversight and review must be available to the detainee prior to any transfer and credible allegations of transfers involving a real risk of torture must be investigated. All the circumstances should be assessed, including the prior practice on the part of the transiting State, the origin and destination of the transiting aircraft or vehicle, and the preparedness or otherwise of the transiting State to share information and/or provide assurances. The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture have emphasized the importance 35