AS/Jur (2023) 17 The current standards and legal instruments seem insufficient to stop transnational repression from occurring, especially in some countries accused of systemic acts of transnational repression. 72. Russia is the most extreme example from the list of these countries. With its state-sponsored “assassination programme” and now no longer a member of the Council of Europe, nothing prevents Russia from continuing its systematic repression of Russian exiles seeking refuge in Europe. The effects of its transnational repression policies will be felt for a long time in Europe. Therefore, member States and Council of Europe bodies should react promptly and decisively to alleviate these effects and prevent these practices from spreading. This is especially true in the context of newly emerging trends to use digital tools for transnational repression, the effects of which remain unpredictable for the host states. 73. The Parliamentary Assembly should first of all condemn the cases of transnational repression committed on European soil, some of which originated in current or former member States. It should also recall that the European Convention on Human Rights applies to extra-territorial violations of the right to life and other fundamental rights committed by formal or secret agents of member States in the territory of other member States, as well as in the territory of third States (as long as there is control and authority through these agents). The Court has recently held that “targeted violations of the human rights of an individual by one Contracting State in the territory of another Contracting State undermine the effectiveness of the Convention both as a guardian of human rights and as a guarantor of peace, stability and the rule of law in Europe”. Procedural obligations to investigate these violations may also arise with regard to the host State, the perpetrator State, or both, depending on the circumstances. In this context, the Court has also recognised a duty to cooperate with each other in transnational cases involving serious breaches of human rights. This should clearly apply to transnational repression cases. From the perspective of host States, they have the positive obligation to protect individuals within their jurisdiction from acts of transnational repression, either by providing specific protection to identified targets in case of real and immediate risks, or at least by not giving their acquiescence or connivance to violations committed by foreign agents in their territory. Furthermore, they have the obligation not to render, transfer, deport or extradite persons exposed or vulnerable to transnational repression, particularly if there is a real risk of a violation of one of the core Convention rights by the requesting/persecuting State, or using extra-legal channels. 74. The European Convention provides a robust legal framework according to which acts of transnational repression should be condemned, investigated and punished by member States. Perpetrators should be held to account. The Court will hold member States to account if they do not properly deal with them domestically, including where the repression has its origins in non-member States. 75. The Assembly should address relevant recommendations such as those recommended by our experts and Freedom House to member and observer States, as well as to those with partnership status with the Assembly. For instance, States should establish an official definition of transnational repression to be used by all government agencies (law enforcement, intelligence services, migration and asylum), which would incorporate it in all their actions and procedures. They should also establish a specific mechanism to track domestic incidents of transnational repression and identify the perpetrator governments. Counterintelligence and law enforcement information-sharing practices should be reviewed to ensure that vulnerable individuals receive adequate warning and protection. 76. States should apply additional vetting to extradition requests and Red Notices from the governments that are known to engage in transnational repression. In this respect, the Assembly should reiterate the recommendations made to States and to Interpol in its Resolution 2315 (2019) “Interpol reform and extradition proceedings: building trust by fighting abuse”, along the lines of the proposals made by the experts on Interpol procedures. 77. States should also consider further screening applications for diplomatic visas to avoid granting accreditation to diplomatic personnel who have harassed or intimidated exiles and diaspora in the past, often abusing diplomatic immunities. They should envisage expelling diplomats who have been directly involved in transnational repression incidents. In terms of accountability, States should impose targeted sanctions on perpetrators and enablers of transnational repression, using their Magnitsky-style laws. This should be extended to the EU sanctions regime. 78. Victims of transnational repression should be protected. In accordance with the positive obligations imposed by the Convention (notably under Articles 2 and 3, but also Article 8), they should improve the 22