2. Public information The more transparent the investigation is, the more confidence the public will have in the content of its reports. Even when dossiers will remain confidential, it is important to explain publicly the methodology followed in generating them, the standards of proof employed, the types of information collected and included in the dossier (e.g., name, rank, incident, role), and similar. When a dossier is to remain confidential it is not advisable to reveal its “meta-content”, such as the number of individuals identified or, for example in the context of an armed conflict, the percentage of perpetrators from each of the parties. Summary of key guidance · Rather than lists of names, generate dossiers on individuals that contain as complete a profile as possible and that represent the conclusions as to the individual’s responsibility for crime or violations; · Inside dossiers, use codes (e.g. interview numbers) to link the information therein with sensitive source materials stored elsewhere; · When sharing conclusions as to responsibility, adhere strictly to the standard of proof: “reasonable grounds to believe” is a minimum threshold; · Indicate clearly in the dossier whether the individual’s conduct has crossed the “reasonable grounds to believe” threshold with respect to each incident; · Be clear in the report that any identification of responsible individuals is not an allegation of guilt in the criminal sense and that the investigative body is not a judicial body and does not avail itself of judicial or police powers; · While maximizing the use of the information gathered, remain strictly within the confines of the informed consent provided, do not compromise the promise of confidentiality made to the source, and strictly respect the “do no harm” principle; · Recall that, once the information leaves its possession, the investigative body can no longer guarantee confidentiality:174 source protection must remain paramount; With the possible exception of sharing within the United Nations, where the recipients would be subject to United Nations protocols on handling sensitive information. 174 104 ATTRIBUTING INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY