B. Standard of proof Also known as “degree of certainty” or “evidentiary threshold”, a standard of proof is that point on a spectrum, between conjecture and absolute certainty, above which an allegation is accepted as proven and below which it is not. Standards of proof70 for CoIs and FFMs are set out in Guidance and Practice,71 but are taken up here because they hold particular relevance when making findings on an individual’s responsibility. Proving the elements of a crime to the criminal standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt” is not expected in a United Nations human rights investigation, particularly considering the lack of police or judicial powers (subpoena, contempt, or special investigative techniques such as wiretaps, surveillance, etc.), the possible difficulties in accessing the information necessary to prove all the elements, and the typically tight reporting deadlines. Most United Nations investigations apply the “reasonable grounds to believe” standard, which is also the one recommended by OHCHR. Meeting this standard means that factual information has been collected which would satisfy an objective and ordinarily prudent observer that the incident has occurred as described with a reasonable degree of certainty.72 The standard of proof must be applied to both of the determinations relevant in identification: (a) that the violation or crime occurred, and (b) that the individual identified was responsible. Investigations must apply the standard to every element that defines the violation or crime, such that no finding of responsibility may be made if any element fails to cross the threshold. In cases where the threshold is not met, an investigation can recommend that further investigation should take place.73 Standards of proof are employed in a variety of legal settings including civil, administrative and criminal law. Examples include “beyond a reasonable doubt”, “clear and convincing”, “balance of probabilities”, “reasonable grounds to believe”, “reasonable suspicion” and “prima facie”. 71 OHCHR’s Guidance and Practice, section IV (C) (7), p. 62. 72 OHCHR methodology also requires that violations be reported as having occurred only if corroborated. Corroboration may occur through multiple independent sources, one of whom may be the victim. Similarly, corroboration may be achieved via a clearly documented pattern of events, or through a reliable body of information consistent with other material tending to show that a violation, incident or event has occurred. 73 “Report of the International Commission of Inquiry on the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya” (A/HRC/17/44), para. 219 (further investigation necessary for specific instances of rape and sexual violence). More on the fundamentals of individual criminal responsibility can be found in annex V (“Sources”), the Rome Statute, and Rule 151 of the ICRC Customary IHL Study (war crimes). More on the operation of modes of liability and mens rea can be found in arts. 25, 28 and 30 of the Rome Statute. 70 COLLECTING AND ANALYSING THE INFORMATION 37