responsible”,44 and in Libya (2011), the mandate required the Commission to “identify those responsible, to make recommendations, in particular, on accountability measures, all with a view to ensuring that those individuals responsible are held accountable”.45 In the Central African Republic (2014), the mandate included to “help identify the perpetrators of such violations and abuses, point to their possible criminal responsibility and to help ensure that those responsible are held accountable”.46 In practice, none of the commissions/missions, except those for Guinea (2009) and TimorLeste (2006), named individual perpetrators in their public reports but instead included these in a confidential list that was then handed to the Secretary-General or the High Commissioner for Human Rights. The Commission of Inquiry on Darfur (2004) explained that it had decided to withhold the names of alleged perpetrators from the public domain for three main reasons: “(a) the importance of the principles of due process and respect for the rights of the suspects; (b) the fact that the Commission has not been vested with investigative or prosecutorial powers; and (c) the vital need to ensure the protection of witnesses from possible harassment or intimidation”.47 The Commission of Inquiry on Libya (2011) explained its reason for not publishing names thus: “This is to prevent risk of harm to those who are held in custody and to avoid jeopardizing the fair trial rights of any persons who may be brought to trial in the future”.48 The two fundamental principles of the protection of sources of information from possible harm and the need to respect the right to fair trial of individuals who are alleged to have committed violations need to guide the approach of commissions/missions on this issue.49 4. PARTIES UNDER INVESTIGATION In general, mandates have not referred specifically to the party whose actions are the subject matter of the inquiry and required the “investigation of all alleged violations” of human rights and, where applicable, humanitarian law. On occasion, however, particularly 14 44 S/2009/556, annex, para. 2 (c). 45 Human Rights Council resolution S-15/1, para. 11. 46 Security Council resolution 2127 (2013), para. 24. 47 S/2005/60, para. 645. 48 A/HRC/19/CRP.1, para. 760. 49 Principle 9 of the “Updated Set of principles for the protection and promotion of human rights through action to combat impunity” (E/CN.4/2005/102/Add.1) states, in relation to international and national commissions of inquiry and truth commissions: “Before a commission identifies perpetrators in its report, the individuals concerned shall be entitled to the following guarantees: (a) The commission must try to corroborate information implicating individuals before they are named publicly; (b) The individuals implicated shall be afforded an opportunity to provide a statement setting forth their version of the facts either at a hearing convened by the commission while conducting its investigation or through submission of a document equivalent to a right of reply for inclusion in the commission’s file”. COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRY AND FACT-FINDING MISSIONS ON INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS AND HUMANITARIAN LAW