Transparency in investigating violations: commissions of inquiry

This is an excerpt from a report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions.

Web links to this page are welcome, but formal citations should be to the official report, E/CN.4/2006/53.

25. One of the recommendations contained in the Special Rapporteur’s report to the Commission in 2005 was that national-level investigations of alleged violations of international law by the armed or security forces are indispensable. To be credible and acceptable, however, the results must be made public, including details of how and by whom the investigation was carried out, the findings, and any prosecutions subsequently undertaken.10

26. This recommendation is closely related to the question of impunity which has long been a major focus of the work of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial executions. The problem is typically manifested by a failure to investigate, a failure to report effectively and openly following investigations, or a failure to punish (commensurately) those responsible. An important role in this regard has been played by commissions of inquiry established at the national level. When such initiatives are launched, which is frequently the case following massacres, deaths in custody, police or military shootings, or other extrajudicial forms of execution, they are all too often designed mainly to blunt outrage rather than to establish the truth. Some such commissions are undertaken in good faith and result in published reports which contribute significantly to the promotion of respect for human rights. An excellent example is that established in 2005 by the Government of Nigeria to investigate the killing of the so-called Apo 6.11 In other cases, however, the procedures, results and responses are much less satisfactory. Some commissions are close to being pro forma activities, in others they are undertaken in good faith but the results are never released, and in still others Governments do eventually release the reports but there is no follow-up of any type.

27. In principle, commissions of inquiry may be perfectly appropriate measures for achieving justice and accountability in response to human rights abuses involving extrajudicial executions. The challenge is to establish accepted standards against which the design of commissions of inquiry can be assessed. In view of the importance of this issue, as illustrated by the many occasions on which the Special Rapporteur has encountered problems linked to inquiries that have been set up, he plans to undertake a study on commissions of inquiry which will be presented to the Human Rights Council in the course of 2007. The study will focus on identifying the principal problems that have been experienced in the past in relation to the conduct of and follow-up to such inquiries and on recommending best practices which might be taken into account by Governments in the future.

RECOMMENDATIONS

61. National-level investigations of major incidents involving alleged violations of international human rights or humanitarian law by the armed or security forces are indispensable. A more detailed study needs to be undertaken in order to identify the principal problems that have been experienced in the past in relation to the conduct of, and follow-up to, such inquiries and to recommend best practices which might be taken into account by Governments in the future.

62. Problems of police accountability are ubiquitous and greatly exacerbate problems relating to extrajudicial executions. The challenge of setting up appropriate accountability mechanisms are complex and deserve more sustained analysis than they have so far received within the international human rights regime.