A/HRC/56/60 44. The Special Rapporteur recalls the complex nature of the harms of trafficking in persons, highlighting that related asylum claims “are particularly unsuited to accelerated processing and may limit the likelihood of identification of victims”.61 VIII. Rights of persons with disabilities 45. The Special Rapporteur stresses the obligations of States and non-State actors to ensure that the rights of victims of trafficking with disabilities are ensured in all actions relating to the prevention of trafficking, the protection of victims of trafficking and persons at risk of trafficking, and accountability. The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and other international human rights law instruments impose both negative and positive obligations that continue to apply in the context of responses to trafficking in persons at sea. Specifically, those include obligations in relation to accessibility, access to justice, equal protection of the law, non-discrimination, ensuring legal capacity, freedom of movement, liberty and security of the person and privacy. The specific risks of trafficking that may be encountered by children with disabilities and women with disabilities must be addressed, recalling articles 6 and 7 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and relevant international human rights and anti-trafficking law. The Special Rapporteur is particularly concerned that search and rescue operations and designation of places of safety for disembarkation do not currently ensure the rights of victims of trafficking or persons at risk of trafficking with disabilities. Such concerns have been raised by the Special Rapporteur in relation to the new pact on migration and asylum, including specifically in relation to the proposed screening regulation, and failures to recognize all forms of disabilities in accordance with the obligations arising under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. IX. Non-refoulement and the prohibition of collective expulsions 46. As is well established, the prohibition of refoulement and collective expulsion is not limited to the territory of a State, but also applies to extraterritorial State action, including action occurring on the high seas. “This is true under international refugee law, as interpreted by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the United Nations General Assembly and the House of Lords, and under universal human rights law, as applied by the United Nations Committee against Torture, and the United Nations Human Rights Committee.”62 47. The prohibition of refoulement applies wherever a State exercises jurisdiction or effective control over the persons concerned, including at sea and on vessels. 63 The prohibition of refoulement and the prohibition of collective expulsion apply also on the high seas. 64 The Special Rapporteur recalls that States must “ensure that maritime border surveillance operations and border control measures do not affect the specific protection 61 62 63 64 GE.24-06692 Group of Experts on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings, 5th General Report on GRETA’s Activities: Covering the Period from 1 October 2014 to 31 December 2015 (Strasbourg, Council of Europe, 2016), para. 116; and “Guidance note on the entitlement of victims of trafficking, and persons at risk of being trafficked, to international protection (Strasbourg, Council of Europe, 2020), para. 38: “early legal counselling and specialised assistance in accordance with Article 12 of the Convention is essential if victims of trafficking are to be enabled to present an asylum claim effectively”. European Court of Human Rights, Hirsi Jamaa and Others v. Italy, Concurring Opinion of Judge Pinto De Albuquerque. Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, general comment No. 2 (2013), para. 51; Human Rights Committee, general comment No. 31 (2004), para. 10; and European Court of Human Rights, Hirsi Jamaa and Others v. Italy, paras. 76–82. European Court of Human Rights, Hirsi Jamaa and Others v. Italy; and N.T. and N.D. v. Spain, application Nos. 8675/15 and 8697/15, Judgment, 13 February 2020, paras. 178, 185 and 187. 13