Statistical Classification Framework A. KILLING Extrajudicial execution or other unlawful killing 10 by State actors or other actors acting with the State’s permission, support or acquiescence who were motivated by the victim, or someone associated with the victim, engaging in activities as a journalist, trade unionist or human rights defender; or while the victim was engaged in such activities; or by persons or groups not acting with the support or acquiescence of the State who were motivated by the victim engaging in activities as a journalist, trade unionist or human rights defender, and/or coupled by a failure of due diligence 11 on the part of the State, such a failure having been motivated by the victim or someone associated with the victim, engaging in activities as a journalist, trade unionist or human rights defender; and other unlawful attacks and destruction in violation of international humanitarian law leading to or intending to cause the victim’s death. Inclusions:12 murder; serious assault 0101 Intentional homicide leading to death; femicide; honour killing;13 voluntary manslaughter; Unlawful death inflicted upon a person killings caused by excessive use of + with the intent to cause death or serious force by law enforcement officials; injury. extrajudicial killings and extra-legal, summary or arbitrary executions. 10 See, articles 3 UDHR, 6 (1) ICCPR, 6(1) CRC, 9 ICRMW, 10 CRPD, and at the regional level, articles 2 ECHR, 4 ACHR and 4 ACPHR. The right not to be arbitrarily deprived of one’s life is considered as a customary norm and non-derogable. I. Bantekas and L. Oette, International Human Rights Law and Practice (CUP, 2013) 315-316, citing Restatement (Third) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States, s 702; Rule 89 of the ICRC Customary International Humanitarian Law Database, and, UN Human Rights Committee, General Comment 6 (1982) and General Comment 24 (1994). From the IHL perspective, article 85(3) a, Additional Protocol I (attacks on civilians) and common article 3, Geneva Conventions (murder). 11 The duty of due diligence implies a duty of vigilance and prevention on the part of the State. International Court of Justice, Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay, Argentina v Uruguay, Judgment of 20 April 2010, para. 204. In terms of State obligations in relation to human rights this duty is often set out as the duty to respect human rights, that is preventing public officials from committing human rights violations, and the duty to protect human rights, that is taking measures to prevent violations by private individuals or entities. CEDAW art 2(e); General Assembly resolution 48/104, Declaration on the elimination of violence against women art. 4(c); Committee on the Elmination of Discrimination against Women, general recommendation No. 19, para. 9; Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 20, para. 2; Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 31, para. 8; Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Velásquez Rodriguez v Honduras, Judgment of 29 July 1988, Series C, No. 4, para. 172; African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Communication No. 245/2002, Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum v Zimbabwe, 21 Activity Report (2006), para. 147. At the regional level, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has held that preventive measures include “all those means of a legal, political, administrative and cultural nature that promote the protection of human rights and ensure that any violations are considered and treated as illegal acts”. Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Velásquez Rodriguez v Honduras, Judgment of 29 July 1988, Series C no 4, para. 175. 12 Irrelevant ICCS legal inclusions that have been deleted: dowry-related killing and infanticide 13 WHO has defined and classified femicide cases on the basis of misogynous or gender-related motive. (http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/77421/1/WHO_RHR_12.38_eng.pdf) 11