A/HRC/48/28 97. A second reported case involved the arrest of a prominent South Sudanese lawyer who had cooperated with the UNMISS Human Rights Division in providing legal aid to defendants, including death row inmates. The individual was reportedly removed from their office by NSS officials without a warrant and taken to an NSS office for interrogation. During interrogation by NSS agents, the individual was reportedly accused of supporting “foreign ideas” and “regime change.” This individual’s home was raided, and their phone and identity documents were confiscated depriving them of freedom of movement. After release from detention, further surveillance and intimidation reportedly continued, and the individual was threatened with re-arrest for sharing information on their case with UNMISS. 98. A third reported case involved a victim of human rights violations who had reported their arbitrary arrest, detention and ill-treatment to UNMISS. Following this sharing of information, the NSS allegedly intimidated the individual, warning the individual not to cooperate further with the Mission. During UNMISS’s follow-up of the case, an NSS officer reportedly warned staff of the Human Rights Division that the victim would unlikely be able to receive UNMISS assistance ‘next time.’ 99. Beyond these three documented incidents, it was reported that government representatives and opposition armed elements regularly intimidate the civilian population to deter its members from providing sensitive information to the UN, in particular representatives of civil society. Upon learning about an impending field visit, the South Sudan People’s Defense Forces and the Sudan People’s Liberation Army in Opposition often inform civilians in areas under their control that they would be beaten if they provide information about human rights violations or security incidents to the UN. Incidents have been reported where detainees have been threatened with re-arrest if they share their experience with the UN, creating an atmosphere of fear and thereby deterring victims and witnesses from contacting or engaging with the UN in public. 25. Sri Lanka 100. The High Commissioner for Human Rights in her 9 February 2021 report to the Human Rights Council noted that “a pattern of intensified surveillance and harassment of civil society organizations, human rights defenders and victims appears to have intensified over the past year, including of those who supported the implementation of Human Rights Council resolution 30/1” (A/HRC/46/20, para. 32).61 The High Commissioner raised concern that this environment “is creating a chilling effect on civic and democratic space and leading to self-censorship” (para. 32) and urged “the authorities to immediately end all forms of surveillance, including intimidating visits by State agents and harassment against human rights defenders, lawyers, journalists, social actors and victims of human rights violations and their families, and to refrain from imposing further restrictive legal measures on legitimate civil society activity.”62 101. The report states that “as of December 2020, over 40 civil society organizations had approached OHCHR with reports of harassment, surveillance and repeated scrutiny by a range of security services, including the Criminal Investigation Department, the CounterTerrorist Investigation Division and the State Intelligence Service, which questioned them about administrative details and the activities of the organization and requested information on staff, including their personal contact details, donors and funding sources” (para. 32). These include organizations who have cooperated, or are seeking to cooperate, with the UN. 102. Further to the adoption of resolution 46/1 by the Human Rights Council in March 2021, it was reported in state-owned media that a senior government official accused civil society activists and other individuals, including members of the political opposition, of providing information to the UN, labelling them as “traitors” for their alleged cooperation with UN human rights mechanisms. 103. On 10 August 2021 the Government responded to the note verbale sent in connection to the present report refuting the claims of “harassment, threats, surveillance.” It invited all 61 62 40 https://www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=26695&LangID=E. Ibid.