Foreword It is a pleasure to present Who’s Responsible? Attributing Individual Responsibility for Violations of International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law in United Nations Commissions of Inquiry, Fact-Finding Missions and other Investigations, a publication whose goal is to assist efforts to ensure accountability – at the individual level – for violations of international human rights and/or humanitarian law and/or for international crimes. Recent years have seen a rapid expansion in the number of human rights investigations called upon to identify individuals allegedly responsible for violations and crimes. Now more than ever investigations are collecting and processing information pertaining to such individuals, from rank-and-file members of security forces, and mid-level commanders to senior leaders at the top of the hierarchy – in both State and non-State entities. In fact, it is worth noting that United Nations member States’ requests for such identification go back to the apartheid era, when the General Assembly asked the Commission on Human Rights to compile a list of individuals, organizations, institutions and representatives of States that were believed to be responsible for the crime of apartheid. In 1984 the Commission published a list containing over 300 names. While human rights investigative practice and methodology have evolved significantly in the intervening years, individual accountability has always been a key element. All United Nations human rights investigations retain an implicit, if not always explicit, mandate to identify those allegedly responsible for violations so as to further accountability. Doing so is an essential part of the United Nations’ approach to justice, accountability, prevention, and sustainable peace. To fulfil this task, human rights investigations have been adding new elements to existing methodology. They have taken advantage of new technology, added specialized expertise, and refocused approaches to information collection and management. Yet securing information on individuals is only the first step: making use of it in human rights-compliant and accountability-focused ways presents additional challenges. Investigations must respect various human rights norms, including the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial, as well as the victim’s right to truth and to a remedy. This guidance lends its support to future investigations by systematizing our knowledge on the identification of alleged perpetrators and by bringing together the standards bearing on their individual identification. It seeks to set out, in clear, accessible terms, the best practices for such investigations. 7