The United Nations-run Office on Missing Persons and Forensics searches for war missing in Serbia and Montenegro at a cave near the village of Volujak. UN Photo / Afrim Hajrullahu Despite this, undertaking the identification of responsible individuals depends only in part on the mandate. Even when a mandate includes phrases such as “to combat impunity” or “to ensure accountability”, or where it is altogether silent on the issue, there is nevertheless a duty to record, and to safeguard for future use, information on those believed to bear responsibility.18 This holds true also where the investigation has decided not to identify individuals either publicly or confidentially. Proper investigative methodology demands that information collected is recorded and secured. Moreover, a renewed mandate might call for such identification, and ultimately, when the day of accountability comes, such information should be retrievable. 18 Mandate interpretation notwithstanding, every CoI/FFM should properly record and safeguard the information it has on individuals, particularly high-ranking ones or those who appear repeatedly as alleged perpetrators, regardless of rank. OHCHR field presences, for example, may identify individuals as far as capacity permits, not least to build a body of information that can inform the Human Rights Due Diligence Policy, screening, etc. WHETHER TO IDENTIFY INDIVIDUALS 17