Compendium of Standards, Good Practices and Recommendations Methodology Studying the human rights of armed forces personnel in different countries presents some significant challenges. First, while extensive attention has been dedicated to human rights law, the human rights of armed forces personnel have received comparatively minimal attention, aside from previous work by the Geneva Centre for Security Sector Governance (DCAF) and ODIHR. Although there have been some excellent studies on specific legal systems and particular aspects of this issue, there is a clear lack of comprehensive studies and analyses of national practices.8 Another challenge is the gap between legal provisions and their implementation. Norms and standards enshrined in a country’s constitution and laws are not always respected in reality. For these reasons, the research approach in drafting the compendium involved the following steps. Revision of the 2008 handbook A qualitative review was conducted of the original 2008 DCAF-ODIHR Handbook on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of Armed Forces Personnel to identify sections and data that were in greatest need of revision. The findings of this review were compiled into a document that formed the outline of the questionnaire that followed. ODIHR-DCAF questionnaire A questionnaire was devised to identify developments since the original handbook was published. The questionnaire was circulated to all 57 participating States in February 2018, and by June 2018 26 responses had been submitted. The responses were used to provide context to illustrate laws, procedures and practices, as well as comparable data for each participating State that responded. In cases where countries with regular armed forces failed to reply to the questionnaire, it was nevertheless possible to describe parts of their human rights policies and practices in the armed forces by using information obtained from open public sources, NGOs, the media and academic institutions. Box 1.3 shows that not all participating States responded to the questionnaire, while some do not have regular armed forces. In cases where countries with regular armed forces failed to reply to the questionnaire, it was nevertheless sometimes possible to describe parts of their human rights policies and practices in the armed forces by using information obtained from public sources, non-governmental organizations, the media and academic institutions. 8 See, for example: Ibid., Rowe; Georg Nolte (ed.), European Military Law Systems (Berlin: De Gruyter Recht, 2003); and Ghébali and Lambert, op. cit., note 1. 25