I I N T E G R AT I N G A G E N D E R P E R S P E C T I V E I N T O H U M A N R I G H T S I N V E S T I G AT I O N S • G U I D A N C E A N D P R A C T I C E B PLANNING THE INVESTIGATION dimension of the human rights situation and violations and does not exclude key concerns that particularly or differently affect persons of a particular sex or gender. A number of key issues should be addressed at the beginning of the investigation: Narrowing the scope of the investigations to one particular type of human rights violation can render invisible the experience of women and girls, in particular in contexts where particular rights seem to be mainly exercised by men. For example, in some contexts it is mostly men who exercise their right to freedom of expression and assembly and they may be more likely to participate in demonstrations. As a result, if investigations focus only on documentation of the repression of peaceful demonstrations, this prioritization would render invisible the role played by women and their experiences in this context. This could include other forms of women’s expression or participation, the consequences that the repression or detention of their male relatives may have on them or the gender dimension of the human rights concerns that may have triggered the demonstrations in the first place. INTERPRETATION OF THE MANDATE AND SCOPE OF THE INVESTIGATIONS First, investigative teams and CoIs/FFMs should discuss how to integrate gender into their work in the light of their mandate and mission. Mandates are usually broad and defined from a geographical and/or temporal point of view, and/or based on subject matter and/or actors. Mandates should be interpreted as extending to all relevant gender-related concerns, including GBV. This follows from the general principle of non-discrimination in international law and, for HRC mandates, from the declaration made in HRC resolution 23/25, para 17. This is the time to dispel concerns about limitations potentially posed to a gender-sensitive investigation by the wording of the mandate and interpretation of the scope of the human rights analysis or the time and geographical limits of the investigation. A gender analysis should be integrated into the interpretation of the mandate, and strategies in this regard should be discussed at the outset. Similarly, geographic prioritization can also have an impact on gender analysis. For example, women and girls, who are often the majority of displaced populations, experience differently and disproportionately the consequences of the displacement on the enjoyment of their human rights. This can include lack of access to sexual and reproductive health and rights, food or education, and violence in internally displaced person (IDP) and/or refugee settings, including sexual violence. In such contexts, limiting the scope of investigations to the events that have taken place in one particular area or country may fail to document the situation of those living in such settings. This runs the risk of keeping invisible the differentiated consequences on women and girls of the human rights violations that have caused their displacement. When possible, mandates that appear to be geographically or thematically All human rights investigations suffer constrains, challenges and limitations, including in relation to limited time and resources and protection issues for victims, witness, sources and staff, as well as the challenges presented by the cultural and political settings. For many of these reasons, investigation teams might not be able to cover all areas of concern that could fit within the mandate and must therefore perform a prioritization exercise. A gender-sensitive interpretation of the mandate and definition of the scope of the investigation is critical at this early stage to ensure that the outcome of investigations fully considers the gender 16