7. STANDARD OF PROOF In line with their nature and mandate, commissions/missions are not required to establish guilt in the way courts do and as such they do not apply a criminal law standard of proof of “beyond reasonable doubt”. Commissions/missions have most commonly adopted “reasonable suspicion” or “reasonable grounds to believe”, and less frequently “balance of probabilities”, as the standard to make a finding of fact. The standard may depend on the information to which the commission/mission has access. It is important for commissions/missions to clearly indicate in their methods of work the standard of proof they adopt and to include an explicit reference and explanation in their report. The Commission of Inquiry on Darfur (2004) based its findings regarding the identification of perpetrators on “a reliable body of material consistent with other verified circumstances, which tends to show that a person may reasonably be suspected of being involved in the commission of a crime”.59 The same formulation was used for Timor-Leste (2006).60 In Guinea (2009) the Commission of Inquiry based its findings of the responsibility of individuals for violations committed on “independently verified evidence assembled to demonstrate that a person may reasonably be suspected of having participated in the commission of a crime.”61 The Mapping Exercise in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (2008) used the reasonable suspicion standard with reference to an incident having happened: “Reasonable suspicion is defined as ‘necessitating a reliable body of material consistent with other verified circumstances tending to show that an incident or event did happen.’”62 The Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic (2011-2014) adopted the following approach: “Particular incidents are described in the report if there are reasonable grounds to believe that they occurred, namely if the commission obtained a reliable body of evidence, consistent with other information, indicating their occurrence” (emphasis added).63 The Commission of Inquiry on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (2013) also adopted a reasonable grounds to believe standard of proof: “there are reasonable grounds establishing that an incident or pattern of conduct [has] occurred whenever it [is] satisfied that it [has] obtained a reliable body of information, 62 59 S/2005/60, summary. 60 S/2006/822, para. 12. 61 Report of the International Commission of Inquiry mandated to establish the facts and circumstances of the events of 28 September 2009 in Guinea (S/2009/693), para. 22. 62 “Report of the Mapping Exercise documenting the most serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law committed within the territory of the Democratic Republic of the Congo between March 1993 and June 2003”, August 2010, para. 7. 63 “Report of the independent international commission of inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic” (A/HRC/19/69), para. 10. COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRY AND FACT-FINDING MISSIONS ON INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND HUMANITARIAN LAW