A/70/212 risk of discrimination further increases when police forces do not reflect the diversity within the population. 18 19. Police often have wide-ranging discretionary powers. Some discretion may be necessary owing to the nature of their work. However, the broader the discretion, the greater the risk of its arbitrary or discriminatory exercise, particularly in the absence of effective independent oversight mechanisms. 19 Indeed, globally, and specifically in such areas as counter-terrorism legislation where police powers continue to expand beyond the reach of effective oversight mechanisms, minorities are increasingly at risk. 20. Furthermore, police practices that impact a certain minority excessively tend to reinforce the sentiment among the members of the group that they are not an integral part of society. This can ultimately undermine the efforts to protect and promote their identity, as they may seek to hide their st atus in order to avoid unwarranted attention. 20 Such practices can also contribute to the creation of a vicious circle of tension between the police and minority communities. 1. Identity check, stop and search, and surveillance 21. Although most countries affirm their opposition to racial profiling, 21 there are ongoing reports of disproportionate targeting by police of individuals for identity checks, stop and search, or other forms of coercive or privacy -invasive police powers, which are related purely to identity-based minority group characteristics rather than to any credible suspicion that the individual in question has been involved in illegal activity. 22 __________________ 18 19 20 21 22 15-12578 See the working paper of 28 June 2006 (E/CN.4/Sub.2AC.5/2006/WP.1) submitted by Tom Hadden, including the draft “toolkit on integration with diversity in security, policing and criminal justice”; OHCHR, report on the Expert Meeting on Integration with Diversity in Policing, Vienna, 15 and 16 January 2008 (A/HRC/10/38/Add.1), para. 55. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1982/7, paras. 2-39; and E/CN.4/Sub.2/2005/7, paras. 55-56. Special Rapporteur on counter-terrorism and human rights, A/HRC/4/26 (29 January 2007), paras. 56 to 58 (profiling based on ethnicity, national origin or religion). The majority of respondents to the questionnaire declared they prohibit the use of profiling based on minority status. See for example: CCPR/C/USA/CO/4 (HRC, 2014), para. 7; CAT/C/USA/CO/3-5 (Committee against Torture, 2014); CERD/C/CAN/CO19-20 (CERD, 2012); CERD/C/RUS/CO/20-22 (CERD, 2013); A/HRC/27/68 (Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent report on access to justice, 2014), para. 57; A/HRC/24/52/Add.1 (Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent mission to the United Kingdom, 2013); CERD/C/THA/CO/1-3 (CERD, 2012); A/HRC/24/52/Add.2 (WGPAD mission to Panama, 2013); CERD/C/UKR/CO/19-21 (CERD, 2011); CERD/C/ESP/CO/18-20 (CERD, 2011); CERD/C/SWE/CO/19-21 (CERD, 2013); CERD/C/AUT/CO/18-20 (CERD, 2012); A/HRC/21/60/Add.1 (WGPAD mission to Portugal, 2012); CERD/C/FIN/CO/20-22 (CERD, 2012); communication ESP 2/2015 received by the Special Rapporteur on minority issues; and United Kingdom Equality and Human Rights Commission, “Stop and think: a critical review of the use of stop and search powers in England and Wales ” (2010). 7/27