CCPR/C/GC/35 integrity proceeding from any governmental or private actors.15 States parties must take both measures to prevent future injury and retrospective measures, such as enforcement of criminal laws, in response to past injury. For example, States parties must respond appropriately to patterns of violence against categories of victims such as intimidation of human rights defenders and journalists, retaliation against witnesses, violence against women, including domestic violence, the hazing of conscripts in the armed forces, violence against children, violence against persons on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity,16 and violence against persons with disabilities. 17 They should also prevent and redress unjustifiable use of force in law enforcement, 18 and protect their populations against abuses by private security forces, and against the risks posed by excessive availability of firearms.19 The right to security of person does not address all risks to physical or mental health and is not implicated in the indirect health impact of being the target of civil or criminal proceedings.20 II. Arbitrary detention and unlawful detention 10. The right to liberty of person is not absolute. Article 9 recognizes that sometimes deprivation of liberty is justified, for example, in the enforcement of criminal laws. Paragraph 1 requires that deprivation of liberty must not be arbitrary, and must be carried out with respect for the rule of law. 11. The second sentence of paragraph 1 prohibits arbitrary arrest and detention, while the third sentence prohibits unlawful deprivation of liberty, i.e., deprivation of liberty that is not imposed on such grounds and in accordance with such procedure as are established by law. The two prohibitions overlap, in that arrests or detentions may be in violation of the applicable law but not arbitrary, or legally permitted but arbitrary, or both arbitrary and unlawful. Arrest or detention that lacks any legal basis is also arbitrary. 21 Unauthorized confinement of prisoners beyond the length of their sentences is arbitrary as well as unlawful;22 the same is true for unauthorized extension of other forms of detention. Continued confinement of detainees in defiance of a judicial order for their release is arbitrary as well as unlawful.23 12. An arrest or detention may be authorized by domestic law and nonetheless be arbitrary. The notion of “arbitrariness” is not to be equated with “against the law”, but must be interpreted more broadly to include elements of inappropriateness, injustice, lack of predictability and due process of law,24 as well as elements of reasonableness, necessity and proportionality. For example, remand in custody on criminal charges must be reasonable 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 1560/2007, Marcellana and Gumanoy v. Philippines, para. 7.7. States parties also violate the right to security of person if they purport to exercise jurisdiction over a person outside their territory by issuing a fatwa or similar death sentence authorizing the killing of the victim. See concluding observations: Islamic Republic of Iran (CCPR/C/79/Add.25, 1993), para. 9; paragraph 63 below (discussing extraterritorial application). See concluding observations: El Salvador (CCPR/CO/78/SLV, 2003), para. 16. See concluding observations: Norway (CCPR/C/NOR/CO/6, 2011), para. 10. 613/1995, Leehong v. Jamaica, paras. 9.3; see Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials (1990). See concluding observations: Philippines (CCPR/C/PHL/CO/4, 2012), para. 14. 1124/2002, Obodzinsky v. Canada, para. 8.5. 414/1990, Mika Miha v. Equatorial Guinea, para. 6.5. See concluding observations: Brazil (CCPR/C/BRA/CO/2, 2005), para. 16. 856/1999, Chambala v. Zambia, para. 7.3. 1134/2002, Gorji-Dinka v. Cameroon, para. 5.1; 305/1988, Van Alphen v. Netherlands, para. 5.8. 3