Welcome to the United Nations 
OHCHR 
Report
Report on the use of private security companies in places of deprivation of liberty
Issued by
Working Group on the use of mercenaries
Published
04 August 2017
Report
Issued by Special Procedures
Subjects
Self-determination, Mercenaries
Symbol Number
A/72/286
Version
Background
Twice a year, the Working Group on the use of mercenaries issues calls for inputs to inform thematic studies to be presented at the Human Rights Council in its September session and at the General Assembly in October.
In its resolution 33/4, the Human Rights Council emphasized utmost concern regarding the impact of the activities of private military and security companies (PMSCs) on the enjoyment of human rights, in particular when, inter alia, operating in privatized prisons and immigration-related detention facilities. In that resolution, the Council noted that such companies and their personnel were rarely held accountable for violations of human rights, particularly the right to self-determination.
On 27 April 2017, the Working Group convened a public panel event and a private expert consultation with States and civil society organizations to discuss this issue. Representatives of more than 50 States participated in the panel event, along with representatives of civil society organizations, and mainly discussed the human rights challenges and risks of outsourcing prisons and detention facilities to private security contractors, and the measures required to ensure respect for the human rights of persons deprived of their liberty.
Inputs Received
Inputs Received
In preparing this report, the Working Group sent out questionnaires to States, civil society organizations and relevant stakeholders to request information on the use of private security companies in places of deprivation of liberty. In the questionnaire, the Working Group requested information, inter alia, on whether States were: “home States”, where private security companies are registered or incorporated or where the management of such companies is primarily carried out; “contracting States” that directly contract the services of private security companies, including from private security companies that subcontract to other private security companies; or “territorial States”, where private security companies operate, in relation to privatized prison and detention facilities.
Several States responded to the questionnaires mostly by stating that they did not privatize places of deprivation of liberty. Civil society organizations working on issues related to prisons and detention provided important and useful information to the Working Group.
Inputs received have not been made public.