The Special Rapporteur also stressed the need to integrate the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms into legislation relating to counter-terrorism and not to allow for rights and freedoms to be sidelined by other laws. Mentioning the discriminatory nature of ethnic profiling, he also highlighted the ineffective, unnecessary and disproportionate intrusion of full-body scanners at airports. On this, he stated that the hasty decision to implement them was a political response to be seen to be doing something following a failed act of terrorism rather than a carefully thought-out measure to prevent such acts.

Continuing on the topic of counter-terrorism technologies, specifically in regard to the detection of explosives, he expressed that there is currently a bad habit of "going after the bad guy" rather than looking for or using existing technological solutions that are more effective and less intrusive on fundamental rights. He suggested that technologies taking privacy rights into consideration would be more successful and that States should encourage this. Also mentioned was his desire to establish a process building on existing data protection and a future declaration on global information protection. Finally, he reported on detention on the basis of terrorism concerns and his visits to Egypt and Tunisia.

In response to his report, Egypt reiterated their collaboration with the Special Rapporteur in its efforts to draft a counter-terrorism law that would replace State-of-Emergency powers in place since the assassination of the Egyptian president in 1981. The Special Rapporteur however expressed his disappointment in not being allowed to carry out interviews as per his mandate and the nature of the collaboration in regards to the drafting of the new law. Tunisia responded positively to the report and highlighted the improvement in measures to promote and protect rights in countering terrorism. Also of note was the statement made by the Mexican delegation in which they expressed their view that the Special Rapporteur had acted outside of his mandate.