(e) Information sources in investigation planning Another primary consideration when planning investigations that focus on identifying individuals is the nature of access afforded. This includes not only access to locations, material evidence and witnesses, but access to the sources of linkage evidence (see above). Rapid changes in technology and ICTs95 have impacted investigations, opening up new channels of communication that in turn afford new kinds of access to sources. Certainly, investigation methodology must seize these technologies and put them to maximum use, but traditional investigative methods should not be abandoned. Poring over documents and archives may produce as much probative information as a recently posted video. While investigations should begin, at a minimum, with information available in the United Nations itself – for example from desk officers, field presences, special procedures, the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, etc. – a wide range of sources should be considered in the planning process and exploited as relevant. A non-exhaustive list follows: Individuals · Insiders and defectors – thanks to their knowledge of a military’s inner workings, they are probably the best source of information to link the rank and file to the upper echelons, although investigators must take particular care to assess the personal motivation for each piece of information divulged in light of the individual’s potential criminal conduct.96 · Victims/survivors and eyewitnesses – direct testimony from those who saw or experienced the event are key. They might identify the individual involved or describe the particular actions s/he took. Colleagues, friends, family and bystanders are typical providers of direct, eye-witness evidence.97 Internet Communication Technologies (ICTs) See “Perpetrator-targeted questioning”, below. Interviewing insiders and defectors is a particularly sensitive area given security concerns and the potential to affect future judicial processes. It should be undertaken by trained investigators, after they have received legal guidance. 97 There is concern that interviewing witnesses multiple times, for example once by a CoI and again by prosecutors in a criminal trial, might impact testimony, especially in children. See “A Case Study of Witness Consistency and Memory Recovery Across Multiple Investigative Interviews” by Yael Orbach, Michael E. Lamb, David La Rooy and Margaret-Ellen Pipe, Applied Cognitive Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK (2011). Available at: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/227714578. With the exception of situations where “re-traumatization” is an issue, however, the impact of multiple interviews is not necessarily negative, and can potentially even reinforce memory of events. 95 96 52 ATTRIBUTING INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY