Committee on Enforced Disappearances

Report on requests for urgent action submitted under article 30 of the Convention *

A.Introduction

Pursuant to rules 58 and 59 of the Committee’s rules of procedure, all requests for urgent action submitted for consideration under article 30 of the Convention are to be brought to the attention of the Committee. The present report contains a summary of the main procedural and substantive issues that have arisen in relation to the requests for urgent action received by the Committee and in the context of the follow-up to registered requests for the period 17 September 2025 to 28 February 2026.

B.Requests for urgent action received

In its previous report on requests for urgent action, the Committee provided information on the trends observed in the requests concerning disappeared persons that had been registered up to 16 September 2025. Between 17 September 2025 and 28 February 2026, the Committee received 161 new requests for urgent action (compared with 205 in the previous reporting period). At the time of writing the present report, the Committee had decided to register 99 of those requests and 8 additional requests received before the period under review, for a total of 107 new registrations (compared with 144 registrations in the previous reporting period); 5 of the new requests were in the process of being prepared for submission to the Committee.

Of the new requests, 57 were not registered, for the following reasons:

(a)Additional information was requested from the authors of 17 requests, but had not yet been provided at the time of writing the present report;

(b)In five requests, the allegations submitted did not include the constitutive elements of a disappearance or enforced disappearance under articles 2 and 3 of the Convention: two related to Mexico, one to Iraq, one to the Republic of Korea and one to Switzerland;

(c)In 31 requests, the facts referred to a disappearance that had occurred in a State that is not a Party to the Convention: eight related to Guinea, six to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, three to Egypt, three to the Islamic Republic of Iran, two to the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, two to Türkiye, one to Chad, one to Eritrea, one to India, one to the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, one to the Russian Federation, one to Sweden and one to the Syrian Arab Republic;

(d)Three requests referred to cases of so-called short-term enforced disappearance, where the fate and whereabouts of the disappeared persons were clarified before the Committee could register the request: one related to Cuba, one to Mexico and one to Ukraine;

(e)In one request, related to Mexico, the allegations received referred to a case in which the fate and whereabouts of the disappeared person had already been clarified at the time of submission, and information on other available mechanisms under the Convention was therefore provided.

In compliance with the principle of complementarity of the mandates of the two mechanisms, the requests relating to States that have not ratified the Convention and to disappearances that took place before the entry into force of the Convention for the State concerned were forwarded to the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances for its consideration.

As at 28 February 2026, the Committee had registered 2,239 requests (see tables 1 and 2). Of these, 2,160 were registered on the basis of the place of occurrence of the alleged disappearance. Seventy-nine of those requests gave rise to parallel registration where judicial assistance and cooperation mechanisms between various States Parties were deemed necessary: to investigate the alleged disappearance; to strengthen the chances of gathering information relevant to the search for the disappeared person; and to assist the victims, including with regard to accessing information and participating in search and investigation processes. As at 28 February 2026, 3 of the parallel registrations had been transmitted to the other State Party (or States Parties) concerned for information (the practice until 2022) and 79 had been registered under a specific registration number to facilitate the follow-up to the actions taken by each of the States concerned.

Table 1

Urgent action requests registered, as at 28 February 2026, by State Party (place of occurrence of the disappearance) and by year

State Party

2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026 a

Total

Argentina

–

–

–

–

–

2

–

–

1

–

–

–

1

–

–

4

Armenia

–

–

–

–

–

1

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

1

Bolivia (Plurinational State of)

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

1

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

1

Brazil

–

–

1

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

2 b

–

–

3

Burkina Faso

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

1

–

–

1

1

9

–

12

Cambodia

–

–

1

–

–

–

–

2

1

–

–

–

–

2

–

6

Chile

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

1

–

1

Colombia

–

1

1

3

4

3

9

3

2

153

–

4

56 c

15 d

–

254

Croatia

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

1

–

–

–

1

Cuba

–

–

–

–

–

–

1

3

–

188

–

–

2

6

–

200

Ecuador

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

5

27

1

33

Gabon

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

8

–

–

–

8

Honduras

–

–

–

–

–

–

14

–

9

2

–

7

3

1

–

36

Iraq

–

–

5

42

22

43

50

226

104

41

42

10

27

55

2

669

Japan

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

1

–

–

–

1

Kazakhstan

–

–

–

–

–

2

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

2

Lithuania

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

2

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

2

Mali

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

1

11

–

–

–

10

2

24

Mauritania

–

–

–

–

–

1

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

1

Mexico

5

4

43

166

58

31

42

10

57

60

52

86

100

90 e

15 f

819

Morocco

–

–

–

–

1

2

–

–

–

2

2 b

–

–

–

–

7

Niger

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

1

–

–

–

1 b

–

–

2

Nigeria

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

1

–

1

Oman

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

1 b

–

–

–

–

–

1

Paraguay

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

1

–

–

–

–

–

1

Peru

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

14

–

–

–

1

–

–

15

Serbia

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

2

–

2

Slovakia

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

1

–

–

–

–

–

–

1

Spain

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

1 b

–

1

Sri Lanka

–

–

–

–

–

1

–

–

–

–

–

–

1

–

–

2

Sudan

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

1

2

12

16

2

33

Togo

–

–

–

–

–

–

2

–

1

–

–

–

–

2

–

5

Tunisia

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

1

–

–

–

–

–

1 b

–

2

Ukraine

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

3

1

–

1

4

9

Total

5

5

51

211

85

86

118

248

193

459

100

121

212

240

26

2 160

a As at 28 February 2026.

b Including one subject to parallel registration on the basis of the principle of international legal assistance and cooperation.

c Including 52 subject to parallel registration on the basis of the principle of international legal assistance and cooperation.

d Including 10 subject to parallel registration on the basis of the principle of international legal assistance and cooperation.

e Including eight subject to parallel registration on the basis of the principle of international legal assistance and cooperation.

f Including three subject to parallel registration on the basis of the principle of international legal assistance and cooperation.

Table 2

Total registered urgent action requests and parallel registrations, as at 28 February 2026, by year

Request type	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	2021	2022	2023	2024	2025	2026	Total
Urgent action	5	5	51	211	85	86	118	248	193	459	100	121	212	240	26	2 160
Parallel registration	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	1	1	–	54	20	3	79
Total	5	5	51	211	85	86	118	248	193	460	101	121	266	260	29	2 239

Between 17 September 2025 and 28 February 2026, the Committee sent 81 notes relating to 163 registered requests for urgent action to follow up on the implementation of its recommendations and to make new recommendations to the States Parties concerned on the basis of the available information (compared to 60 in the previous reporting period). As at 28 February 2026, the Committee had a backlog of 624 urgent actions ready for follow-up (compared to 481 as at 16 September 2025): 487 in Spanish, 119 in English, 16 in Arabic, 1 in Russian and 1 in French.

C.Urgent action cases that have been discontinued or closed

With regard to the meaning of the terminology it uses as relates to the status of cases that are discontinued or closed, the Committee recalls that:

(a)An urgent action case is discontinued when the disappeared person has been located but is still deprived of liberty; should the individual concerned be disappeared again in the context of the same deprivation of liberty, the Committee could reactivate the urgent action under the same reference number, thereby facilitating the follow-up to the case;

(b)An urgent action case may also be discontinued where, according to the information available, the whereabouts of the disappeared person appear to have been clarified, but the authors of the request question the official information and consider that additional action, mainly to be taken by the authors themselves, is necessary to fully confirm the location of the disappeared person. In such circumstances, the Committee may discontinue the case, requesting the State Party to take the measures necessary to allow the requested confirmation. Should those measures not be taken, or should they contradict the initial information provided on the fate and whereabouts of the disappeared person, the Committee may decide to reactivate the urgent action;

(c)An urgent action case is closed when it is confirmed that the disappeared person has been found at liberty, has been found and released or has been found dead.

As at 28 February 2026, 546 disappeared persons on whose behalf an urgent action case was opened have been located, including 9 during the current reporting period. The Committee welcomes the fact that 427 disappeared persons have been located alive since the beginning of the implementation of the procedure. Consequently, 496 urgent action cases have been closed, and 50 have been discontinued. The Committee recalls that a large majority of cases in which the disappeared person was located alive relate to disappearances that took place in the context of protests in Colombia and Cuba, where the persons were deprived of their liberty and their relatives were denied any information as to their fate and whereabouts during the disappearance. The tables below show the number of urgent action cases discontinued or closed, by State Party (see table 3), or by year and State Party (see table 4).

Table 3

U rgent action cases that are no longer open, by State Party, as at 28 February 2026

	Closed	Discontinued	Total
Argentina	2	–	2
Bolivia (Plurinational State of)	1	–	1
Burkina Faso	2	–	2
Cambodia	2	–	2
Colombia	160	–	160
Cuba	173	27	200
Gabon	6	2	8
Honduras	1	–	1
Iraq	29	12	41
Kazakhstan	2	–	2
Lithuania	2	–	2
Mali	1	–	1
Mauritania	–	1	1
Mexico	96	1	97
Morocco	1	4	5
Peru	14	–	14
Sri Lanka	1	1	2
Sudan	1	–	1
Togo	2	2	4
Total	496	50	546

Table 4

Urgent action cases closed or discontinued, as at 28 February 2026

Year	Total number of cases closed or discontinued in the referenced year	Number of cases closed or discontinued, disaggregated by country
2015	3	Iraq (3)
2016	2	Iraq (2)
2017	31	Iraq (3), Mexico (26), Morocco (2)
2018	6	Argentina (1), Iraq (2), Mexico (2), Sri Lanka (1)
2019	24	Cambodia (1), Cuba (1), Iraq (5), Mauritania (1), Mexico (14), Morocco (1), Togo (1)
2020	23	Bolivia (Plurinational State of) (1), Cambodia (1), Cuba (3), Iraq (11), Kazakhstan (2), Mexico (4), Togo (1)
2021	19	Cuba (1), Iraq (4), Lithuania (1), Peru (13)
2022	317	Colombia (151), Cuba (159), Iraq (4), Mexico (2), Sudan (1)
2023	70	Argentina (1), Burkina Faso (1), Colombia (7), Cuba (28), Honduras (1), Iraq (4), Lithuania (1), Mexico (25), Morocco (1), Peru (1)
2024	21	Burkina Faso (1), Colombia (2), Cuba (1), Gabon (8), Iraq (3), Mexico (5), Sri Lanka (1)
2025	22	Cuba (7), Mexico (13), Togo (2)
2026	8	Mali (1), Mexico (6), Morocco (1)
Total	546

D.Suspension of urgent action cases and related rules

In accordance with the established criteria, the Committee may suspend the follow-up to an urgent action case when the authors of the request have freely and unequivocally expressed their wish not to continue with the procedure, or where the source can no longer be reached or is unable to pursue the case and steps taken by the Committee to contact other sources have not been successful. The follow-up on a suspended urgent action case is to be immediately reactivated upon the receipt of new information from the authors.

When the same case is submitted under the individual complaint procedure of the Committee, the urgent action case remains open until a final decision is adopted by the Committee. Upon the adoption of a final decision, the Committee determines whether to suspend the urgent action case, on a case-by-case basis.

As at 28 February 2026, the Committee had suspended follow-up in 308 urgent action cases for lack of reply by the authors of the requests (as compared with 301 as at 16 September 2025) despite the reminders sent (see table 5 below). Over the reporting period, 10 urgent action cases were reactivated upon the receipt of new comments from the authors (as compared to seven in the previous reporting period).

Table 5

Suspended urgent action cases, as at 28 February 2026

	Suspended
Colombia	12
Ecuador	3
Honduras	13
Iraq	24
Mali	1
Mexico	251
Slovakia	1
Sri Lanka	1 a
Ukraine	2
Total	308

Note : Suspended cases can be reactivated immediately upon the receipt of overdue information from the authors of the request.

a Relates to a parallel registration on the basis of the principle of international legal assistance and cooperation concerning an alleged disappearance in Oman.

E.Developments since the end of the twenty-ninth session

Through its recommendations, the Committee provides guidance on the development of the search and investigation processes. It also often acts as a point of contact between the authors and State authorities. The quality of the information provided is key in allowing the Committee to properly analyse the situation. Whenever doubts arise, the secretariat of the Committee contacts the source of the information.

The information received during the reporting period both confirms trends previously identified in the reports adopted by the Committee at its eleventh to twenty-ninth sessions and illustrates new trends. The following paragraphs are not intended to be an exhaustive analysis of all the information received under the urgent action procedure, but refer to issues that the Committee considers to be of public interest.

1.Cooperation and interaction of authors of urgent action requests with the Committee

The Committee reiterates the central role of the authors of urgent action requests in ensuring the efficiency of the procedure. All the information they share with the Committee is duly analysed and taken into account.

During the reporting period, key information as to the possible perpetrators or location of the disappeared person or about the availability of new witnesses or pieces of evidence was shared in respect of some cases. The Committee transmitted that information to the State Parties concerned without revealing the source and requesting the authorities to take immediate action in that regard. On various occasions, the victims emphasized that the Committee’s support in transmitting the information had been paramount, as the fear of reprisals had prevented them from transmitting the information themselves. They also highlighted the impact of the urgent action procedure on the development of the search and investigation process in their cases, as illustrated by the following messages:

“I would also like to express my gratitude to the United Nations experts who mobilized to demand accountability, denounce the injustice, and call for my release. Their public stance was a breath of humanity at a moment when everything seemed intent on tearing me away from life and from the protection of the law.” (Testimony of a person who was located alive following the registration of an urgent action.)

“I sincerely appreciate the Committee’s commitment to truth, justice and international oversight through the urgent action concerning my mother, as well as its continued efforts to ensure that search and investigative actions are conducted with transparency and in accordance with standards of due diligence.”

“We sincerely thank the Committee for its support, encouragement and commitment. Your assistance has been a source of hope for all of us, and the family deeply appreciates your efforts in pursuing truth and justice.”

“I wish to express my most sincere gratitude for the Committee’s continued work, its ongoing follow-up and its sustained efforts to keep my mother’s disappearance case active. The attention and support provided by the Committee have been fundamental for my family and for me and represent an example of institutional commitment to the rights of disappeared persons and their families.”

“You are the only ones who have restored even a little hope to us. Thank you very much for your support.”

“Thank you for your attention and for your tireless work to protect human rights and combat enforced disappearances.”

Regrettably, various authors have also expressed their concern and frustration at the delays in the Committee’s process for sending follow-up letters to the States Parties to convey the available information and make new recommendations. The Committee highlights that such delays affect the efficiency of this life-saving procedure and are a factor in revictimization. It reiterates that the effectiveness of the procedure depends fully on the proper allocation of staff resources to analyse the cases, prepare the registration and follow-up notes, maintain contact with the States Parties and authors of the requests and interact with the Committee regarding the cases on a daily basis. The Committee remains concerned that the current staffing resources allocated to the urgent action procedure (one Professional-level staff member officially in charge, with the support of volunteers from other teams) remain insufficient to ensure timely action on and follow-up of all cases, despite the full commitment of the Committee and its secretariat to do so.

2.Cooperation and interaction of States Parties with the Committee

Under article 30 (3) of the Convention, States Parties have the obligation to inform the Committee, within a specified period of time, of measures taken to locate and protect the person on whose behalf an urgent action request has been registered and, under article 26 (9), to cooperate with the Committee and assist its members in the fulfilment of their mandate. As in previous reporting periods, most States Parties replied to the requests sent by the Committee.

In this connection, the Committee welcomes once more the effort demonstrated through the details provided in the replies sent by Colombia, Ecuador and Mexico.

Nonetheless, the Committee is particularly concerned that some replies from the States Parties are merely standard responses and do not provide any information as to the measures taken by the competent authorities to search for the disappeared persons and investigate the alleged disappearances. This trend is particularly concerning in the cases related to Iraq. As highlighted in previous reports, and despite the concerns transmitted to the State Party in that regard, the authorities continue sending standard responses with no concrete information on the cases (see paras. 72–78 below).

The Committee is also concerned about the replies in which the States Parties concerned report that the person on whose behalf an urgent action request was registered is deprived of liberty, without specifying where the person is detained. In such cases, the Committee has reminded the States Parties that, in accordance with articles 17 and 18 of the Convention and relevant standards:

(a)The competent authorities are to immediately provide information regarding the exact location where a person is detained;

(b)The deprivation of liberty must occur exclusively in a detention facility that is officially recognized and subject to oversight by the relevant authorities;

(c)Detained persons must be guaranteed the right to communicate, without delay, with their family, legal counsel or any other person of their choosing, and to receive visits from them immediately;

(d)Detained persons must be provided with immediate, regular and appropriate medical care, specific to their health condition;

(e)The families of persons deprived of liberty, legal representatives, lawyers and any other person with a legitimate interest must be granted access to the information specified under article 18 of the Convention.

The Committee, recalling that effective cooperation requires substantive communication, encourages each State Party:

(a)To provide detailed information on the specific measures taken to search for the disappeared person concerned and to investigate the disappearance, and to implement the Committee’s recommendations;

(b)To indicate clearly whenever it cannot provide a reply concerning a recommendation, explaining the reasons, in order to allow the Committee to analyse the challenges faced and to duly assess the situation;

(c)To contact the secretariat of the Committee whenever clarification is needed or to suggest ways to improve the urgent action procedure.

22.The Committee also wishes to highlight the efforts by States Parties, notably Colombia and Costa Rica, to provide substantive replies related to cases in which parallel urgent action requests have been registered (see paras. 34–38 below), with a view to enhancing the search and investigation on the basis of international legal assistance pursuant to articles 14 and 15 of the Convention (see para. 5 and table 2 above).

23.If a State Party fails to provide the information requested by the Committee under the urgent action procedure, the Committee sends reminders to the Permanent Mission concerned. In addition, to prevent a lack of response from undermining accountability in the cases concerned, the Committee sends a note verbale to the States Parties concerned on a yearly basis, with a list of all urgent action requests for which the deadlines set in the final reminders have expired, requesting an update on the actions taken. The replies received are transmitted to the authors, and the Committee considers the action to take in the light of the outcome of the consultation process. As at 28 February 2026, the Committee remains concerned about the lack of responses to final reminders regarding a total of 186 requests for urgent action, sent to Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Côte d’Ivoire, Iraq, the Niger and the Sudan, compared with 178 overdue responses as at 16 September 2025 (see table 6). In that connection, the Committee notes that during the reporting period States Parties submitted replies to 4 of the 178 previously overdue requests.

Pursuant to rule 62 (7) of the Committee’s rules of procedure, the complete list of urgent action requests, including information concerning which States Parties have received a final reminder, is available on the Committee’s web page (updated after each session of the Committee). The list is referred to in the annual report the Committee submits to the General Assembly and is also shared with the Human Rights Council.

Table 6

Number of urgent action requests for which the deadline set in the final reminder sent to the State Party concerned has expired, as at 28 February 2026

State Party	As at 28 February 2025	As at 16 September 2025	As at 28 February 202 6
Burkina Faso	-	-	1
Cambodia	2	2	2
Côte d ’ Ivoire	-	1 a	2 b
Iraq	167	163	162
Mexico	18	-	-
Niger	-	1	1
Sudan	4	11	18
Total	191	178	186

a Relates to a parallel registration on the basis of the principle of international legal assistance and cooperation concerning an alleged disappearance in the Niger.

b Relates to two parallel registration s on the basis of the principle of international legal assistance and cooperation concerning alleged disappearances in the Niger and Tunisia .

3.Registration notes sent by the Committee to States Parties

Since October 2024, the Committee has implemented a new structure for the notes transmitted to the State Parties upon the registration of urgent action requests. On the basis of the response received and following the analysis of the information gathered, the Committee transmits new recommendations and relevant information to support collaboration with the State Party until the whereabouts of the disappeared persons have been clarified.

(a)Search and investigation

In all cases, the Committee starts by issuing recommendations to, and requesting information from, the States Parties concerned on the search and investigation processes carried out in the specific case.

(b)Interim measures for protection

When the Committee receives information that relatives or representatives of the disappeared person, or pieces of evidence relevant for the search and investigation, are at risk, it can request the State Party to adopt interim measures of protection. In that context, the Committee reminds the State Party of its obligation to take such measures immediately, in consultation with the persons concerned, and requests the State Party to review the established protection scheme periodically, in order to ensure that the individuals concerned can pursue their search and investigation activities safely, and that their basic needs in that regard are met. In cases where pieces of evidence are at risk of destruction, the Committee has requested the State Party concerned to adopt immediate measures to protect the evidence.

(c)Information for and participation of relatives

The Committee requests the State Party to take action to promote the participation of relatives and access by them to information on the search and investigation processes. Whenever another State is related to the case by reason of the nationality of the disappeared persons, or the place of residence of their relatives, the Committee requests the State Party to ensure that mechanisms are established in coordination with the other State or States so that all relevant information is made available and relatives are able to access to information and participate effectively, even if they reside in another country.

(d)Differential approach

Whenever the profile of a victim so requires, the Committee requests the State Party to ensure the adoption of a differential approach. During the period under review, this was applied to cases where the disappeared person is a woman, a child or adolescent, an older person, a person with disabilities or requiring a specific medical treatment, a person belonging to an ethnic, religious or linguistic minority, or a person of diverse sexual orientation or gender identity. The Committee has also requested States Parties to take a differential approach where the disappeared person has children, to ensure that the specific requirements of those children are duly taken into account, including by providing accurate information appropriate to their age, providing spaces for the expression of emotions and active participation, providing ongoing psychological and emotional support and using messages that reaffirm their safety.

The Committee has observed that the differential approach concept is not always effectively operationalized in practice. In view thereof, the Committee has provided recommendations with concrete operational actions tailored to the requirements of the disappeared persons and their relatives, taking into account the specific circumstances of each case. During the reporting period, such an approach was adopted in cases concerning women and children, including in the context of migration; persons of diverse sexual orientation or gender identity; and older persons (see principle 4 of the Guiding Principles for the Search for Disappeared Persons).

4.Trends regarding the urgent action requests registered during the reporting period

(a)Trends observed

Of the disappeared persons concerned in the 107 requests registered during the reporting period:

64% (69) are men or boys (compared with 88% in the previous reporting period).

36% (38) are women or girls (compared with 12% in the previous reporting period), including 1 (1%) who was pregnant at the time of her disappearance.

10% (11) are minors (compared with 9% in the previous reporting period), of whom 64% (7) are boys and 36% (4) are girls.

5% (5) are older persons (compared with 1% in the previous reporting period), of whom 40% (2) are men and 60% (3) are women.

1% (1) is a man who belongs to an ethnic, religious or linguistic minority (compared with 1% in the previous reporting period).

41% (44) are migrants and other persons on the move, of whom 43% (19) are men or boys and 57% (25) are women or girls. Among them, 14% (6) are children (67% (4) boys and 33% (2) girls).

4% (4) are human rights defenders (compared with 6% in the previous reporting period), including 2 (2%) who are family members engaged in the search for a disappeared person, both men.

None of the new registered cases related to persons with disabilities (compared with 2% in the previous reporting period).

None of the new registered cases related to LGBTIQ+ persons (the same as in the previous reporting period).

Of the requests registered during the reporting period, 37% relate to Mexico (40 urgent action requests), 10% to Mali (11 urgent action requests), 9% to Colombia (10 urgent action requests), 8% to Costa Rica (9 parallel registrations), 6% to Iraq (6 urgent action requests), 6% to the Sudan (6 urgent action requests), 6% to Cuba (6 parallel registrations), 4% to Ukraine (5 urgent action requests), 4% to Ecuador (4 urgent action requests), 4% to Honduras (4 parallel registrations), 2% to Serbia (2 urgent action requests) and around 1% each to Italy, Morocco, Nigeria and Spain (1 urgent action request to each country).

(b)Specific allegations

The Committee considers it of utmost importance to make public the circumstances of the facts put to its consideration, with a view to shedding light on the different dimensions of the phenomenon of enforced disappearance and to fostering greater awareness thereof. Accordingly, the Committee includes descriptions of the facts when the number of registered urgent action requests related to a State Party is not too large to do so. For other cases, the Committee provides a general description of trends identified in the cases presented. The list of registered urgent action requests is available on the Committee’s web page.

(i)Allegations of disappearances in the context of migration

During the reporting period, the Committee registered 41 new urgent action requests concerning disappearances in the context of migration. In all these cases, the Committee requested the States Parties concerned to strengthen cooperation and mutual legal assistance with the competent authorities of the States of nationality of the disappeared persons, the States of residence of their relatives, and of other relevant States, in accordance with articles 14 and 15 of the Convention and principle 9 of the Guiding Principles. It recommended the establishment of official cooperation mechanisms to facilitate the exchange of information and evidence, including identity documents and DNA samples, and to ensure support for relatives residing abroad. The Committee further requested the State Parties concerned to consider the Committee’s general comment No. 1 (2023) on enforced disappearance in the context of migration, in particular with regard to conducting a contextual analysis of disappearances of migrants in the area, including possible links to trafficking in persons. Such recommendations were transmitted in the cases referred to below.

a.Allegations related to Colombia, with parallel registration to Costa Rica and Ecuador

Over previous reporting periods, the Committee registered 101 urgent action requests related to the disappearance of nationals of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (most of those requests), Colombia and Ecuador who disappeared in 2022 and 2023 after having left San Andrés, Colombia, on boats with the aim of reaching Nicaragua and the United States of America. During the reporting period, 16 new urgent action requests were registered on behalf of persons disappeared in the same events, bringing the total of related urgent action requests to 117. Of these, 57 related to Colombia as the place of occurrence, 57 were parallel registrations relating to Costa Rica, where evidentiary elements were located, and 3 were parallel registrations relating to Ecuador, the country of nationality of three of the disappeared persons. The information received contained allegations of a direct link between various Colombian military units and the network of smugglers.

b.Allegations related to Mexico, with parallel registrations to Cuba and Honduras

During the reporting period, the Committee registered 21 urgent action requests concerning the disappearance in October and December 2024 of two groups of migrants, including nationals from Cuba and Honduras, travelling through Chiapas, Mexico, with the intention of continuing towards the United States of America. In both cases, the persons concerned were last in contact with their relatives when they were in the locality of San José el Hueyate, Mexico, before reportedly boarding small boats bound for Oaxaca, Mexico, after which communication ceased. In this context, the information received included allegations of possible links between State agents and organized criminal groups operating in the area, as well as indications that the competent authorities did not take immediate measures to search and investigate. To date, the fate and whereabouts of the persons concerned remain unknown.

c.Allegations related to Serbia

During the reporting period, the Committee registered urgent action requests concerning the disappearance in November 2023 of two nationals of Türkiye travelling along a migratory route towards countries that are members of the European Union. They were apprehended by Croatian authorities for irregular border crossing and readmitted two days later to Serbia pursuant to the 2007 readmission agreement between the European Community and Serbia. No official information has been made available regarding their reception, registration or subsequent transfer within Serbia following that readmission. To date, their fate and whereabouts remain unknown.

d.Allegations related to Spain and Morocco

The Committee registered an urgent action request concerning the disappearance in January 2025 of a man who had contacted his family from the port of M’diq, Morocco. He informed his family that he intended to travel to Ceuta in order to migrate to Spain in search of employment. Since then, his relatives have been unable to contact him. The disappearance was reported to the Moroccan and Spanish authorities, but no information clarifying his whereabouts has been provided.

Allegations of disappearances in other contexts

a.Allegations related to Colombia, with parallel registrations to Costa Rica and Italy

With regard to Colombia, in addition to the disappearances in the context of migration presented above (see para. 35), the Committee registered an urgent action request concerning the disappearance in Colombia of a dual national of Costa Rica and Italy. The person allegedly left his residence intending to travel to Buenaventura and later contacted relatives stating that he had been detained by police officers. Communication ceased shortly thereafter. To date, there is no information on his fate and whereabouts. This case gave rise to parallel registrations to Costa Rica and Italy on the basis of the principle of international legal assistance and cooperation (arts. 14 and 15 of the Convention).

b.Allegations related to Ecuador

During the reporting period, the Committee registered new urgent action requests concerning four disappearances; three occurred in 2024 and one in 2018.

In the first case, it is alleged that in September 2024, approximately 15 members of the armed forces arrived in two pickup trucks and entered a residence in Los Ríos. They reportedly removed two persons from the house, forced them into one of the trucks and drove them to an unknown location. Relatives have filed complaints and sought information, but have not obtained clarification as to the fate and whereabouts of the persons concerned.

The second case concerns the disappearance in 2018 of a young woman in Quito who attended a medical appointment and was reportedly seen shortly thereafter leaving her residential compound, intending to join her mother at a nearby shop. Information received refers to possible sightings later that day and to a hospital attendance registered under the same name. Despite these elements and the time elapsed, she has not been located. Her fate and whereabouts remain unknown.

The third case concerns a disappearance in April 2024 in Esmeraldas, when approximately 16 uniformed military personnel reportedly arrived at the residence of the victims in two white vehicles, restrained the relatives at gunpoint and subjected one of the persons to severe violence, including threats, physical assaults and electric shocks, before removing him from the residence and taking him to an unknown location. The Committee received audiovisual material documenting the operation. To date, relatives have not obtained official information clarifying the fate and whereabouts of the disappeared person.

c.Allegations related to Iraq

During the reporting period, the Committee registered six new urgent action requests concerning Iraq. The reported disappearances occurred between 2014 and 2025 in the Governorates of Salah al-Din, Diyala and Kirkuk and in the Kurdistan Region. According to the available information, the disappearances were allegedly carried out by State agents or by armed groups reportedly affiliated with State security forces.

Three of the cases concern events that took place between 2014 and 2018 in the Governorates of Salah al-Din and Diyala, in areas reportedly under the control of Iraqi security forces and affiliated armed groups. According to the available information, the persons concerned were apprehended either during house raids or after passing through areas controlled by units affiliated with the Popular Mobilization Forces. In some instances, witnesses identified members of armed factions wearing official uniforms. Following their arrest, the individuals were reportedly taken to unknown locations and have not been seen since.

Another case concerns events that took place in Kirkuk in 2015, where a man was reportedly abducted by armed individuals allegedly affiliated with State security forces. Approximately three weeks later, he was able to contact his relatives and inform them that he was being held in a detention facility allegedly located beneath a public hospital. No official acknowledgment of his deprivation of liberty has been made.

Two of the cases concern events that took place in the Kurdistan Region, one in 2022 and one in 2025. In the first case, a man was abducted in Amadiyah by armed men reportedly affiliated with a political party in an area controlled by State authorities. In the second case, a man disappeared in Sulaymaniyah after leaving his hotel and has not been seen since. According to the available information, he may have been deprived of liberty.

In all six cases, relatives have approached police, security and judicial institutions on multiple occasions to enquire about the fate and whereabouts of the disappeared person, but they did not obtain any official information. Additionally, the information available seems to indicate that the authorities have failed to take prompt and effective search and investigation measures (see also paras. 72–78 below).

d.Allegations related to Mali

During the reporting period, the Committee registered 11 new urgent action requests concerning Mali, relating to disappearances that occurred between November 2024 and October 2025. In all cases, it is alleged that the disappearance was directly perpetrated by State agents.

One case concerns the disappearance, in January 2025, of a group of 14 individuals travelling from Niono to the Mauritanian border. Urgent action requests were registered in respect of nine of those individuals; no information was available as to the identity of the others. Two days after their disappearance, a burned vehicle was reportedly discovered along the route they had taken, together with charred human remains and personal belongings that may belong to the disappeared persons. Additional human remains were allegedly found nearby. The area was reportedly marked by a strong presence of State security forces. Despite the discovery of human remains and the information transmitted to the authorities, including testimonies and audiovisual material, the available information indicates that no effective measures have been taken to identify the remains and to clarify the fate and whereabouts of the disappeared persons.

The two other cases concern events that took place in Bamako in November 2024 and October 2025. In both cases, armed men reportedly arrived at a private residence in unmarked vehicles, forced their way inside and took the persons concerned to an unknown location. One of the disappeared persons was 91 years old at the time. Witnesses stated that the men identified themselves as agents of the gendarmerie or as agents of State security services. Despite complaints and repeated requests for information, the authorities have not provided any official information as to the fate and whereabouts of the disappeared persons. The information received also indicates that both disappearances were carried out in a similar manner.

At the time of preparing the present report, the State Party had not provided any reply concerning the group of disappearances described in paragraph 50 above, despite the reminders sent by the Committee. With regard to the other two cases, the Committee is awaiting a response from the State Party, to be provided by the established deadline.

e.Allegations related to Mexico

The 40 urgent action requests concerning Mexico registered during the reporting period relate to disappearances that occurred between September 2011 and January 2026; of those, 13 occurred in 2024, 16 in 2025 and one in 2026. Characteristics of the cases were as follows:

(a)A total of 30% relate to disappearances that occurred in Chiapas (12 urgent action requests); 17% occurred in Jalisco (7); 12% each in Guanajuato and Sinaloa (5 each); 10% in Oaxaca (4); 5% each in Baja California and Tamaulipas (2 each); 3% each in Mexico, Aguascalientes and Hidalgo (1 each);

(b)Profiles of the disappeared persons:

65% (26) men or boys

35% (14) women or girls

17% (7) minors, of whom 57% (4) boys and 43% (3) girls

3% (1) older person

3% (1) family member engaged in the search for a disappeared person;

(c)Of the new registered urgent action requests, 10 led to parallel registration on the basis of the principle of international legal assistance and cooperation – 6 related to Cuba and 4 to Honduras in their quality of country of nationality of the disappeared person (see para. 36 above).

Most of the urgent action requests registered during the reporting period relate to group disappearances in the context of migration in Chiapas between October and December 2024 (see para. 36 above).

In Jalisco, several cases reportedly involved the alleged direct participation of State agents or individuals presenting themselves as such. In one case, armed men identifying themselves as members of a prosecutorial authority forcibly took several persons from a workplace and video footage showed a municipal police patrol nearby. In another case, a person was allegedly detained by individuals travelling in vehicles bearing municipal police markings, although relatives were later told that no such operation had taken place. According to the available information, key investigative steps, including identifying and interviewing State agents and analysing video and geolocation data, appear to have been delayed or not carried out.

In Guanajuato, a minor was allegedly taken from his home by individuals wearing military uniforms. Witnesses reported having seen members of the National Guard detaining him. The minor’s father, who actively searched for his child and denounced the alleged involvement of State agents, subsequently disappeared, despite the Committee’s request to the State Party for interim measures of protection for him. Other cases in the state reflect delays in search actions and limited efforts to examine all relevant hypotheses, including possible State involvement.

In Sinaloa, a number of the reported disappearances occurred in areas affected by intensified violence and territorial disputes. The Committee received allegations that criminal groups operate in certain municipalities in contexts where collusion or tolerance by State agents have been repeatedly reported. Cases include persons taken from their homes by armed men, and group disappearances occurring at workplaces. In Oaxaca, one case concerns several workers who were reportedly stopped and questioned at a checkpoint shortly before losing contact with their relatives. Authorities have allegedly not taken effective measures to identify and interview the officials allegedly involved or to determine whether their interaction with the victims is linked to the disappearance.

With regard to older cases related to disappearances that occurred more than eight years ago (in Baja California, Tamaulipas, Jalisco and Guanajuato), the Committee is particularly concerned about the lack of tangible progress in the search and investigation processes. Reportedly, actions of the authorities in charge of the cases often remained limited to sending formal requests for information to detention centres or health institutions, without comprehensive field searches, forensic analysis or the full exploration of investigative hypotheses.

The Committee also registered urgent action requests related to alleged enforced disappearances in the context of trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation or in the context of forced recruitment by criminal groups. One case relates to the disappearance of a young woman in Guanajuato in September 2025 and another concerns the disappearance of a young boy in Jalisco in June 2025. In both cases, the Committee received allegations of collusion between State agents and criminal actors.

Across several states, the information submitted to the Committee reflected obstacles to the participation of relatives, their limited access to case files, prolonged periods without information being provided to them, and threats or intimidation linked to their search efforts that were not adequately investigated (see paras. 84 and 86 below).

The Committee welcomes that over the reporting period, two persons were located alive in Mexico following the registration of an urgent action request on their behalf.

f.Allegations related to Nigeria

During the reporting period, the Committee registered one urgent action request concerning Nigeria, related to a national of Egypt residing in Türkiye who had travelled to Nigeria on 19 August 2025. After landing in the country, he informed his relatives that he was completing the arrival procedures. Shortly thereafter, all communication with him ceased. Witnesses alleged that he may have been apprehended by Nigerian security authorities. To date, no official information has been provided regarding his fate and whereabouts.

g.Allegations related to the Sudan

During the reporting period, the Committee registered six new urgent action requests concerning the Sudan. The cases involve civilians who were reportedly deprived of liberty between April 2024 and January 2026. According to the allegations received, some of the disappearances were carried out by the Sudanese Armed Forces during raids or house searches or at checkpoints, while the majority appear to have been committed by the Rapid Support Forces, sometimes in conjunction with other armed groups, with the alleged authorization, support or acquiescence of some State agents.

In one case, a man was reportedly arrested at his residence by armed individuals wearing uniforms of the Sudanese Armed Forces, without presentation of a warrant or an explanation of the legal grounds for his arrest, and taken to an unknown location. Since his alleged arrest, his relatives have received no official confirmation of his detention or information regarding his fate and whereabouts.

Other cases reportedly occurred in areas affected by clashes and military operations between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces. According to the information received, individuals were apprehended in El Fasher and Khartoum North during episodes of fighting or security operations and subsequently taken to unknown locations. In two cases, video material received by the Committee appears to show detainees restrained and subjected to acts of violence before being transferred. Additional persons were reportedly detained near their homes or while travelling through areas affected by ongoing clashes.

In the light of the evolving situation in the Sudan and the rapidly shifting territorial control (between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces), and taking into account the complementary nature of their mandates, the Committee and the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances have agreed to coordinate their actions in cases arising in the country. In that connection, the Committee recalls that, as its mandate stems from an international treaty, it can interact only with State authorities, whereas the Working Group decided in 2019 that it may document violations tantamount to enforced disappearance allegedly perpetrated by non-State actors. Accordingly, when the available information suggests that a disappearance may be linked to State agents and/or to a non-State actor that may be exercising de facto control over certain areas: (a) the Committee transmits an urgent action request to the State Party requesting the implementation of all reasonable measures, within the scope of its powers, to search for the disappeared person and investigate the alleged disappearance; and (b) the Working Group transmits a corresponding request to the non-State actor concerned to search for and locate the disappeared person. In all cases, the two mechanisms coordinate their interventions to avoid protection gaps and ensure accountability. To date, this approach has been applied in respect of 12 urgent action requests registered by the Committee.

h.Allegations related to Ukraine

During the reporting period, the Committee registered four new urgent action requests concerning Ukraine. The cases involve men reportedly deprived of liberty between January 2025 and January 2026. One case relates to two foreign nationals who had returned to Ukraine to finalize their exit from the country, where they had lived for many years. During their stay, they remained in regular contact with their relatives until early 2025, when communication suddenly ceased. Both men were allegedly detained by Ukrainian law enforcement authorities, but the Ukrainian authorities have confirmed only that the two individuals entered the country and have not left since. No official information has been provided regarding their fate and whereabouts.

Two additional cases concern men who were allegedly apprehended in public places by individuals, said to be affiliated with State authorities, who did not present identification or legal grounds for deprivation of liberty. The allegations received state that these disappearances took place in a context of practices described as involving possible forced recruitment by State-affiliated entities. In both cases, the authorities of the State Party have not provided information as to the whereabouts of the persons concerned, despite repeated requests for information from the persons’ relatives and representatives. In these cases, as it has done in respect of other States Parties, the Committee recalled that a deprivation of liberty may amount to an enforced disappearance when the constitutive elements set out in article 2 of the Convention are present, namely the arrest, detention, abduction or any other form of deprivation of liberty by agents of the State or by persons or groups of persons acting with the authorization, support or acquiescence of the State, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or by concealment of the fate or whereabouts of the disappeared person, thereby placing the person concerned outside the protection of the law.

The Committee maintains close coordination with the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances, in line with the complementary nature of their respective mandates, with regard to cases concerning Ukraine addressed by the Committee under its urgent action procedure and by the Working Group under its humanitarian procedure. This coordination has proven particularly relevant for cases concerning disappearances allegedly perpetrated on the territory of Ukraine by agents of the Russian Federation.

(iii)So-called short-term disappearances

In view of the increase in allegations received by the Committee concerning so-called short-term enforced disappearances, the Committee and the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances issued a joint statement in which both mechanisms clarified that there is no duration element in the definition of enforced disappearance under international human rights law. Both mechanisms consider it paramount to keep track of such practices. Nonetheless, taking into account that the time frame of such disappearances is usually too short to allow for the registration of a case, the Committee keeps a record of allegations received concerning: (a) cases in which the person concerned was located before the information was submitted to the Committee; and (b) cases in which an urgent action request was not formally registered because the release or location of the alleged victim was confirmed before the Committee could proceed with the registration. During the reporting period, the Committee recorded allegations concerning three cases: one related to Cuba, one to Mexico and one to Ukraine (see para. 3 above).

5.Replies received from States Parties

(a)General trends

The Committee welcomes the engagement of the States Parties with its urgent action procedure, as reflected in the replies submitted during the reporting period. The content of these replies largely reflected trends observed in previous years, with some gradual developments. Most replies remain general, and/or do not respond to all the Committee’s recommendations.

(b)Trends observed in the replies of Iraq

The Committee regrets that the concerning trends observed in the replies of Iraq in previous reporting periods persist. The replies provided by the State Party still do not contain any information on the concrete measures taken to implement the Committee’s recommendations, particularly with regard to the search for disappeared persons and the investigation of their disappearance. The Committee notes that none of the replies received demonstrate that the State authorities have established and implemented search strategies that include action plans and timelines to locate disappeared persons and conduct impartial investigations, in line with the requirements of due diligence and supported by adequate resources and properly trained and independent personnel.The Committee is also concerned by the lack of information on measures taken to ensure that relatives and representatives have access to information on the search and investigation processes, can effectively participate in those processes and are protected against threats, intimidation and reprisals.

The Committee further observes that most replies submitted by the State Party remain vague and, at times, inconsistent with information previously provided in relation to the same case. Many replies are also largely identical across different urgent action requests and do not address the specific circumstances of the cases concerned.

According to the information provided by the State Party, the measures reported remain limited to a small number of recurrent actions. Usually, the replies state that different authorities consulted their records without finding any match with the disappeared person and/or requested relatives of disappeared persons to go to the forensic medicine department to review photographs of unidentified bodies, without clarifying whether additional material was available that could justify the repetition of such reviews. In other cases, the State Party asserts that the disappeared person is considered to belong to a terrorist group or to be deceased, without providing elements to substantiate such affirmations. In yet other cases, the State Party requests the Committee to provide additional information concerning the disappeared person, such as copies of the identification documents or addresses, even though this information has already been transmitted to the State Party by the Committee, sometimes on several occasions.

The Committee also notes with concern that the State Party tends to send fragmented replies through small messages sent over time, usually with isolated information that frequently contradicts previous communications. Such a practice does not allow the Committee to have a clear view of the search and investigation measures taken by the authorities in charge of the cases and prevents any effective follow-up and clarification of the cases.

In urgent action requests concerning groups of disappeared persons, the replies often address only some of the cases. This occurs despite the Committee’s efforts to facilitate the provision of information by clearly identifying each case, including through tables listing the names of the disappeared persons together with the corresponding urgent action request number.

The Committee notes that, during the reporting period, the State Party replied in respect of various cases that it did not have information on the fate and whereabouts of the disappeared person and would inform the Committee should new information become available.

Overall, the Committee regrets that the State Party does not describe any measures taken to search for the persons and investigate the disappearances, and to implement the Committee’s recommendations, including when the recommendations have been reiterated. In that connection, the Committee underscores that in all follow-up notes it either highlighted that the transmitted recommendations were a reiteration of the previous ones or it retransmitted the previous notes verbales in full, insisting on the obligation of the State Party to implement each of the recommendations and to provide the Committee with concrete information on the search and investigation measures, the challenges faced and the results obtained.

(c)Trends observed in the replies of Mexico

The Committee notes positively that, during the reporting period, most of the replies from the State Party concerning registered urgent action requests were submitted in a timely manner. However, it remains concerned by several trends identified in previous reporting periods.

Regarding the Committee’s recommendations related to the establishment of search and investigation strategies, the Committee notes that most of the replies of the State Party do not provide information in that regard. When the authorities of the State Party refer to such strategies, the information provided does not reflect that they include action plans and timelines to locate the disappeared persons and conduct impartial investigations, in line with the requirements of due diligence and supported by adequate resources and properly trained and independent personnel. While the Committee does not expect the State Party to reveal information covered by the confidentiality of the procedure, it recalled in its follow-up notes that the State Party should provide information that demonstrates the existence of effective, comprehensive and coordinated strategies and plans of actions that involve all competent authorities in charge of the case. In that context, the Committee also requests the State Party to ensure that all hypotheses are fully investigated, including allegations that, based on the information available, the cases may amount to enforced disappearance.

As relates to the information on the actions taken by the authorities to search and investigate, the Committee welcomes the detailed replies provided by the State Party. Nonetheless, the Committee notes that, in most cases, the activities described relate to multiple cases, with no specification regarding the extent to which the particular circumstances of each of the cases concerned are considered, or regarding the impact that those circumstances have on the progress of the corresponding search and investigation.

In this context, the Committee has highlighted its concern that, according to reports, in most cases there are long delays before the authorities consider the available data related to places of relevance for a specific case and before they take action on the basis of that data. Such delays are also frequently reported with regard to requests for video surveillance recordings and telephone records, which seriously affects the relevance and availability of such material for the search and investigation processes.

The Committee also notes with concern the limited information provided regarding measures to ensure the reliability and effective use of genetic data in the search for disappeared persons. In particular, the available information suggests that there are challenges in ensuring that the genetic profiles of disappeared persons and their relatives are properly collected, registered and compared, which affects the effective use of such information for identification purposes. The Committee frequently recalls to States Parties concerned the need for a centralized register and recommends that, in the meantime, they should ensure that the genetic samples collected are checked against all existing registers.

The Committee is also concerned that, according to information received, the efficiency and effectiveness of the measures taken to ensure that relatives and representatives have access to information on the search and investigation processes seem to depend mainly on the persistence of the relatives and whether they have the support of representatives. In most cases, it appears that no official mechanisms have been established to systematically guarantee access to information for, and the participation of, relatives and their supporters and representatives. In that regard, the Committee systematically highlights that if it is not possible to share information or allow participation due to issues related to the confidentiality of the investigation or for reasons beyond the control of the State Party, the authorities must ensure that these limitations are exceptional and temporary, the existence and reasons for the limitations must be explained in advance to the interested persons and the results obtained must be shared with those persons in a timely manner.

The Committee is also concerned by multiple allegations regarding attempts by agents in charge of the search and investigation processes to obstruct or delay those processes, including by refusing to receive complaints of disappearance, declining to take additional statements, failing to consider submitted elements relevant to cases and suggesting that the victims stop searching for their loved ones. In that connection, the Committee notes with concern that the replies of the State Party rarely refer to the actions taken to investigate, and impose sanctions on perpetrators of, such practices in accordance with article 12 (4) of the Convention.

The Committee further notes that, in many of the replies regarding protection measures for the relatives of disappeared persons, the State Party merely indicates that the persons have been granted the status of victim, with no information on the measures adopted to ensure their protection from threats, intimidation and reprisals. This concern is particularly underscored by a case received during the reporting period concerning the disappearance of a father actively involved in the search for his disappeared son, for whom the Committee had requested the adoption of interim measures of protection (see para. 56 above).

(d)Trends observed in the replies of Ecuador

While the Committee takes note of the State Party’s efforts to reply within the established deadlines, it is concerned that the information is usually provided in a standard format that refers to general actions and challenges, only addressing some of the Committee’s recommendations. The replies provided also do not specify the concrete progress achieved in the search for the disappeared persons and in the investigation of the alleged disappearances.

The Committee is particularly concerned that all the replies received refer to the refusal of the Ministry of National Defence and the Armed Forces to provide the information requested by the prosecutor’s office regarding the operations in which the alleged disappearances are reported to have occurred, under the argument that such information is “classified” or “secret”. In all cases, the Committee has reiterated that, pursuant to article 18 of the Constitution of Ecuador, in cases of human rights violations, no public entity is to refuse to provide information, and that, in accordance with article 12 (3) of the Convention, each State Party shall ensure that the authorities in charge of the search and investigation processes have the necessary powers and resources to conduct the investigation effectively, including access to the documentation and other information relevant to their investigation.

The Committee is further concerned by information received that relatives and representatives have faced challenges in accessing the information related to their cases. In that regard, the Committee consistently highlighted that, where it is not possible to share information or allow the participation of relatives and representatives in such processes due to issues related to the confidentiality of the investigation or for reasons beyond the control of the State Party, the authorities must ensure that these limitations are exceptional and temporary, their existence and causes must be explained in advance to the persons concerned, and the results obtained must be shared with those persons in a timely manner.

6.Reprisals and interim measures

During the reporting period, the Committee received new allegations from authors of requests for urgent action regarding reprisals, usually involving threats and retaliation against the relatives of disappeared persons or their representatives, aimed at dissuading them from participating in or promoting search and investigation processes, particularly in Burkina Faso, Ecuador, Mexico and Mali.

In 25.6% of urgent action requests that are currently open, concerning 354 disappeared persons, the Committee has requested the States Parties concerned to take interim measures to preserve the lives and integrity of threatened individuals and to allow them to pursue their search activities without being subjected to violence, intimidation or harassment, in accordance with article 24 of the Convention and principle 14 of the Guiding Principles for the Search for Disappeared Persons. The Committee has also requested the States Parties concerned to ensure that such measures are taken in consultation with the persons requiring protection and are subject to review at their request. Measures were also requested to protect pieces of evidence against destruction.

In one urgent action case related to Mexico that was closed following the location of the disappeared person, the Committee considered that the seriousness of the threats received required a follow-up on the person’s situation and that of his relatives by the Committee’s rapporteur on reprisals. This follow-up is ongoing.